Divis.oii... 

Section 

Ng, 


Ml 


Famous  Women  of  Sacred    Story; 

the  Old  and  New 
Testament.  Two 
Volumes;  Each  a 
Scries  of  Sixteen 
I'cpular  Lectures, 
faithful  delineations 
and  pen  pictures  of 
the  most  noted 
characters  in  His- 
tory. The  good  and 
evil  traits  in  these 
famous  women  are 
made  to  read  a 
salutatory  lesson  to 
their  sisters  of  the 
present  day,  em- 
phasizing reverent 
faith  in  the  Bible, 
rather  than  the  new 
versions  of  "wo- 
man's rights."  By 
Rev.  M.B.Wharton, 
D.D.  Beautifully 
Each,  $1.50. 

Historical  and  Patriotic   Addresses, 

Centennial   and  Quad- 


rennial, comprising  up- 
wards of  one  hundred 
select  orations  and 
poems,  delivered  in 
every  State  of  the  Union 
on  t'.ie  one  hundredth 
anniversary  of  American 
Independence,  by  I  Ion. 
Wm.  M.  Evarts,  Rev. 
Dr.Storrs,  M.W.Beech- 
er,  Charles  P.  Adams, 
Robert  C.  Winthrop, 
Horatio  Seymour,  Ceo. 
Wm.  Curtis,  Cliauncey 
M.  Depew,  and  others, 
— issued  under  t!ie  aus- 
pices of  t'.ie  respective 
authors.  Including  the  most  noted  Columbian  Ad- 
dresses of  1892-91.  Edited  by  F.  Saunders,  A.M., 
Librarian  of  Astor  Library.     io48  octavo  p,  $3.50. 


illustrated.     318  and  340  pages. 


E.  B  TREAT  &  CO.,  211-213  W,  23(1  St.,  Hew  York 


BIBLE    DIFFICULTIES 
Old  Testament 


BIBLE  DIFFICULTIES 


AND    THEIR 


Alleviative  Interpretation 


BY 

ROBERT  STUART  MacARTHUR 

Pastor  of  Calvary  Baptist  Church,  New  York 


®l&  ^eetament 


NEW  YORK 

E.    B.    TREAT    &    COMPANY 

241-243  Wkst  230  Street 

1899 


Copyright,  1898 

By   E.  B.  treat  &   COMPANY 

New  York 


PREFACE. 


During  the  past  few  months,  the  .substance  of 
the  chapters  comprising-  this  volume  was  deliv- 
ered in  addresses  on  consecutive  Sunday  evenings 
in  the  regular  course  of  the  author's  ministry  in 
the  Calvary  Baptist  Church.  He  has  long  felt 
that  most  of  the  difficulties  generally  supposed  to 
be  in  the  Bible  are  not  really  in  the  Bible ;  but 
are  in  the  human  interpretation  of  the  Bible, 
rather  than  in  the  divine  revelation  itself.  It  is 
vastly  important  to  separate  between  erroneous 
biblical  exposition  and  the  actual  truth  of  divine 
revelation. 

The  newer  scholarship,  it  will  readily  be  ad- 
mitted, has  disturbed  the  faith  of  some  Bible  stu- 
dents; but  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  it  has 
given 'the  Bible  a  fresh  interest  and  an  increased 
value.  It  is  not  necessary  to  accept  all  the  con- 
clusions of  the  so-called  Higher  Critics;  indeed, 
these  conclusions  are  often  at  variance  with  one 
another,  and  more  careful  criticism  will  entirely 
refute  some  of  the  positions  taken.  But  we  can 
readily  see  that  the  later  criticism  has  done  much 
to  disabuse  the  minds  of  some  readers  of  their 
traditional  interpretations  and  unauthoritative 
preconceptions  of  Holy  Scripture ;  and,  as  a  re- 
sult, the  Bible  was  never  so  new  and  so  attractive 
a  library  as  it  is  at  this  hour.     It  never  was  so 


ID  PREFA  CE. 

carefully  studied  as  now ;  and  it  never  has  been  to 
the  church  or  to  the  race  the  blessing  which  it 
will  be  in  the  near  future.  The  aim  of  these  dis- 
courses is  to  separate  between  false  interpreta- 
tion and  genuine  revelation.  Miracles  which  God 
performs  we  unquestioningly  receive;  miracles 
which  men  imagine  we  are  free  to  accept  or  re- 
ject. 

This  volume  contains  a  selection  rather  than  a 
collection  of  difficulties  in  the  Old-Testament 
Scriptures.  Questions  asked  by  members  of  the 
author's  congregation,  and  by  correspondents  in 
different  parts  of  the  country,  partly  guided  him 
in  his  selection  of  the  difficulties  discussed. 
Doubtless,  many  passages  of  Scripture  which  are 
serious  difficulties  to  the  minds  of  some  readers 
have  been  omitted ;  but  it  was  not  possible  to  in- 
clude all  within  the  limits  of  a  volume  of  con- 
venient size.  Still  it  is  believed  that  the  most 
serious  difficulties  are  here  discussed.  The  au- 
thor regrets  that  these  discussions  do  not  more 
fully  combine  the  results  of  the  latest  and  most 
reverent  scholarship  with  the  spirit  of  sincere 
love  to  the  Holy  Book  and  its  divine  Author.  Of 
his  failures  in  all  respects  he  is  distinctly  and 
deeply  conscious;  nevertheless,  he  hopes  that  as 
these  discussions  have  proved  helpful  to  many 
hearers,  and  also  to  his  own  spiritual  faith  and 
life,  they  may  be  blessed  in  the  wider  circle  to 
which,  through  this  volume,  they  are  now  intro- 
duced. This  is  his  sincere  desire  and  earnest 
prayer  as  this  volume  goes  forth. 

Calvary  Study,  New  York  City, 
October,  1898. 


CONTENTS 


Chapter  Page 

I.  Was  there  Really  Light  Before  the  Sun?  .        .     13 

II.  Was  the  World  Made  in  Six  Solar  Days  ? .         .  25 

III.  Where  and  What  was  the  Garden  of  Eden?      .  39 

IV.  What  were  the  Sin  and  Sentence  in  Eden?        .  53 
V.  What  was  Cain's  Mark,  and  Who  was  his  Wife?  69 

VI.  Who  were  the  Sons  of  God  and  the  Daughters 

of  Men? 87 

VII.  Does  God  Repent  and  the  Spirit  Withdraw?    .  107 
VIII.  Was  the  Noachian  Flood  Universal  or  Local?  .  125 
IX.  What  was  the  Purpose  of  the  Tower  of  Babel?  145 
X.   Was   Lot  Wise   in   Pitching  his  Tent  toward 

Sodom? 163 

XL  Who  was  Melchizedek,  the  Mysterious  King- 
Priest?     179 

XII.   Was  the  Destruction  of  Sodom  Natural  or  Su- 
pernatural?     .....••   197 

XIII.  Did  God  Mean  that  Abraham  Should  Really 

Offer  Isaac? 217 

XIV.  Did  Rebekah  and  Jacob  Cheat  Isaac  and  Rob 

Esau? 235 

XV.  Who  was  the  Wrestler  with  Jacob  at  Jabbok?  .  253 
XVI.   Did  God  or  Pharaoh  Harden  Pharaoh's  Heart?  2G9 


1 2  CONTENTS. 

Chapter  Page 

XVII.  Was  the  Passage  of  the  Red  Sea  Supernatural?  287 

XVIII.  What  were  the  Symbols  called  the  Urira  and 

Thummim? 305 

XIX.  Did  Balaam's  Ass  Literally  Speak  with  Man's 

Voice? 327 

XX.   Did  the  Sun  and  Moon  Stand  Still  at  Joshua's 

Command? .  345 

XXI.   Did  Jephthah  Really  Sacrifice  his  Daughter?   .  359 

XXII.  Did  Samuel  Appear  when  Summoned  by  the 

Witch  of  Endor?     ......   373 

XXIII.  Did  Two  She-bears  Destroy  Forty-two   Chil- 

dren ? 389 

XXIV.  Was  the  Destruction   of  the   Canaanites  Vin- 

dicable  ? 405 

XXV.  Are  the  Imprecatory  Psalms  Justifiable  or  even 

Explicable? 417 

XXVI.  Are  the  Prophet  Jonah  and  the  Great  Fish  His- 
torical?    435 


I. 

WAS  THERE    REALLY  LIGHT    BEFORE    THE 

SUN? 


I. 

WAS    THERE    REALLY    LIGHT     BEFORE 
THE    SUN? 

Truly  sublime  are  the  opening  words  of  Gene- 
sis. No  other  historical  writing  approaches  its 
first  verse  in  grandeur  and  majesty.  It  implies 
the  existence,  the  eternity,  the  freedom,  the  om- 
nipotence, the  intelligence,  and  the  goodness  of 
God.  The  first  sentence  denies  atheism,  for  it 
assumes  God.  It  denies  materialism,  for  it  as- 
serts Creation.  It  denies  pantheism,  for  it  declares 
the  personality  of  God.  The  word  bara,  trans- 
lated "created,"  is  one  of  three  words,  the  others 
being  yatsar  and  asaJi,  used  in  this  section,  and 
bara  always  has  God  for  its  subject,  whatever  its 
object  may  be.  Yatsar^  formed,  and  asali,  made, 
both  refer  to  construction  out  of  pre-existing  ma- 
terials, and  both  are  predicable  of  God  and  man. 
The  verb  bara^  in  its  simple  form,  occurs  forty- 
eight  times,  according  to  Dr.  Murphy,  and  always 
in  one  sense.  The  word  "Elohim,"  translated 
God,  is  found  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  fifty- 
seven  times  in  the  singular,  and  about  three  thou- 
sand times  in  the  plural,  according  to  the  same 
authority.  In  the  plural  it  may  mean  the  "  Eter- 
nal Powers,"  but  it  is  correctly  translated  God. 
Later  references  will  be  made  to  the  significance 


1 6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

of  its  plural  form,  conjoined  with  verbs  and  ad- 
jectives in  the  singular,  being  thus  somewhat  of 
an  anomaly  in  language,  and  giving  a  suggestion 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  Godhead, 
which  was  later  fully  revealed. 

In  the  preceding  verses  the  inspired  writer  de- 
scribed the  condition  of  the  world  while  in  its 
chaotic  state.  Now  he  enters  on  the  details  of 
that  stupendous  process  by  which  the  whole  was 
reduced  to  order,  and  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
were  made  to  appear  in  their  beauty  and  glory. 
The  great  secret  of  the  entire  process  is  the  being 
and  the  power  of  God.  Remove  God  from  this 
lofty  history,  this  noble  poem,  this  sublime  an- 
them, this  glorious  oratorio  of  primeval  wisdom 
and  goodness,  and  you  have  nothing  left  behind 
but  darkness,  mystery,  and  chaos.  Insert  God  in 
the  history,  and  all  becomes  perfectly  reasonable, 
and  partially  explicable.  Every  thoughtful  man 
must  admit  that  there  is  far  less  mystery  and 
difficulty  with,  than  without,  God.  Eliminate 
God,  and  you  eliminate  reason  as  well  as  faith. 
Atheism  has  no  explanation  to  give  of  Creation ; 
it  leaves  the  whole  subject  involved  in  impene- 
trable darkness  and  hopeless  mystery.  Admit 
God,  and  the  hymn  of  Creation  has  beauty,  maj- 
esty, and  glory.  Thus  it  comes  to  pass  that  "  God 
said"  is  the  keynote  to  this  sublime  song.  This 
word  of  God  removes  all  ideas  of  blind  force  and 
senseless  matter.  Thus  it  is  that  God's  presence 
and  power  in  the  first  majestic  words  of  Genesis 


Pf^AS    THERE   LIGHT  BEFORE    THE   SUN?     i? 

answer  a  thousand  questions  of  the  human  mind 
and  heart.  Past  all  the  works  of  Creation  we 
must  go  to  the  person  of  God  as  the  divine 
Author. 

God  Not  Eliminated. 

Behind  the  visible  universe  stands  God.  Men 
talk  of  the  laws  of  nature.  What  do  they  mean? 
What  is  a  law?  A  law  is  only  a  name  which  we 
give  to  the  manner  in  which  we  have  observed 
some  force  to  act.  If  the  force  be  physical,  we 
have  a  physical  law;  if  moral,  we  have  a  moral 
law.  A  law  is  not  a  force,  but  a  form;  not  a 
motor,  but  a  motion;  not  a  power,  but  a  process. 
Law  implies  a  lawgiver,  evolution  an  evolver,  or- 
der an  ordainer.  There  stands  God.  We  have 
often  permitted  ourselves  to  be  confused  as  to  the 
true  definition  of  law.  We  have  allowed  our- 
selves to  think  of  law  as  if  it  were  endowed  with 
power  and  possessed  of  personality.  Even  if  evo- 
lution were  fully  established,  it  would  not  elimi- 
nate God.  Nothing  can  be  evolved  that  has  not 
first  been  involved.  There  stands  God.  Back  of 
all  processes  is  God  as  the  almighty  power.  But 
how  are  we  to  understand  the  words  "  and  God 
said"?  Did  God  literally  utter  His  voice  in  that 
primeval  solitude?  Did  His  voice  echo  through 
that  chaotic  abyss?  This  we  cannot  suppose. 
We  have  here  an  example  of  the  application  to 
God  of  terms  which  usually  arc  applied  to  human 
beings.     In  this  way  the  Bible  often   speaks   of 


l8  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

God's  face,  ear,  hand,  and  voice.  In  harmony 
with  this  usage  the  Bible  speaks  of  God  as  repent- 
ing and  as  performing  other  acts  characteristic  of 
man.  This  usage  is  what  the  theologians  call  an 
example  of  anthropomorphism.  If  God  is  to 
communicate  with  men  He  must  adopt  methods 
which  men  can  understand,  and  if  men  are  to 
speak  of  God,  they  must  use  the  only  language 
which  it  is  possible  for  them  to  employ.  "God's 
speaking  is  His  willing,  and  His  willing  is.  His 
doing."  This  is  the  first  time  that  the  phrase 
"  God  said"  is  used  in  this  narrative,  but  it  is  used 
in  all  ten  times  in  the  account  of  the  creation.  It 
is  also  a  characteristic  form  of  expression  in  the 
Old  Testament.  We  have  it  in  such  forms  as 
"God  spake,  saying,"  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts,"  and  such  other  expressions  as  "  the  word  of 
the  Lord  came,  saying." 

On  reading  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  we  are 
reminded  of  the  first  chapter  of  John's  Gospel, 
"  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word."  Observe  the 
similarity  between  these  two  great  opening  chap- 
ters. What  is  the  irresistible  conclusion?  The 
"  God-said"  of  the  Old  Testament  is  the  God-word 
of  the  New  Testament.  The  Jehovah  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  the  Jesus  of  the  New  Testament. 
In  John  we  further  read  that  Jesus  made  all 
things  which  were  made.  At  this  point  also  the 
two  records  harmonize.  In  Genesis  we  have  the 
majestic  words,  "  Let  there  be  light,  and  there 
was   light" ;    or,  more    literally,   "  Light  be,    and 


I  FAS    THERE   LIGHT  BEFORE    THE   SUN?     1 9 

light  was."  The  sublimity  of  these  words  in  the 
original  cannot  be  fully  reproduced  in  English. 
It  appears  more  completely  in  the  Greek  of  the 
Seventy  and  in  the  Latin  Vulgate.  Longinus, 
the  famous  Platonic  philosopher  and  finished  rhe- 
torician, born  at  Athens  or  in  Syria,  about  213 
A.D.,  a  student  in  Alexandria  and  finally  a  teacher 
in  Athens,  the  man  whose  knowledge  was  so  great 
and  varied  and  his  critical  taste  so  acute  that  he 
was  called  a  "living  library"  and  a  "  walking  mu- 
seum," refers  to  these  words  as  an  illustration  of 
his  theme  when  writing  of  the  Sublime.  The 
Eternal  Word  speaks,  and  light  is.  Finely  has 
Dr.  George  Dana  Boardman  said:  "Man's  words 
are  but  sounds,  God's  words  are  deeds.  He  but 
speaks,  and  lo!  light,  sky,  ocean,  mountain,  tree, 
animal,  man,  star,  universe.  He  spake,  and  it 
was;  He  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast." 

Light  before  the  Sun. 

But  just  here  a  difficulty  arises.  Whenever  the 
mind  of  the  Infinite  comes  into  contact  with  the 
finite,  an  insoluble  problem  emerges.  The  finite 
can  apprehend,  but  cannot  comprehend  the  In- 
finite. Now  we  know  God,  not  as  He  is,  but  as 
we  are.  Now  at  best  we  see  through  a  glass 
darkly.  Could  there  have  been  light  before  the 
sun's  creation?  Can  there  be  any  alleviative  ex- 
planation? Assuredly  there  can.  We  arc  told 
that  the  sun  is  the  primary  source  of  light,  and, 


20  OLD    TESTAMENT   DIFEICULTIES. 

in  a  measure,  the  statement  is  true.  We  are 
now,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  in  the  first  day  of 
Creation,  but  when  we  reach  the  fourth  day  we 
are  told  that  God  made  the  sun.  We  immediately 
ask,  "  How,  then,  could  there  have  been  light  on 
the  first  day?"  At  this  point  many  are  embar- 
rassed and  some  are  staggered.  I  well  remember 
how  I  once  was  puzzled  because  of  this  apparent 
contradiction  in  the  inspired  narrative.  Sceptics 
quickly  seized  upon  these  statements  as  if  they 
were  the  result  of  crass  ignorance  on  the  part  of 
the  writer  of  the  Creation  records.  As  early  as 
the  days  of  Celsus,  who  lived  in  the  second  cen- 
tury after  Christ,  and  wrote  about  150  a.d.,  this 
objection  to  the  Mosiac  record  of  the  Creation 
was  urged.  But  in  wonderful  ways  have  the  au- 
thoritative conclusions  of  science  come  forward  as 
witnesses  to  the  truth  of  this  sacred  story. 

Let  us  look  at  some  of  the  explanations  which 
have  been  offered.  Some  say  that  the  sun  was 
created  at  the  first  a  perfectly  luminous  body, 
but  that  the  vapors  arising  from  the  condition  of 
the  world  at  the  time  shut  out  his  light,  and  that 
when  God  said,  "Let  there  be  light,"  He  simply 
dispersed  these  mists  and  vapors  and  thus  caused 
the  light  of  the  sun  to  be  seen.  They  thus  make 
the  light  only  a  inanifestation  of  what  was  pre- 
viously in  existence,  and  not  the  creation  of  some- 
thing which  until  then  had  no  existence.  But  they 
have  still  to  account  for  the  creation  of  the  sun, 
or  at  least  for  the  narrative  touching  that  point  in 


IVAS    THERE   LIGHT  BEFORE    THE   SUM?     21 

the  history  of  the  fourth  day.     This  they  do  by 
supposing  that  there  we  have  not  the  account  of 
the    Sim's  creation,    but  only   the   record  of  the 
command  tliat  the  sun  was  appointed  to  rule  by 
day.      Augustine  thought   that    this  was   simply 
spiritual    light;    and   Calvin  recognized    the   dis- 
tinction between  this  light  and  that  mentioned  in 
connection  with  the  creation  of  the  sun,  but  he 
had  no  very  clear  explanation  to  give.     But  the 
narrative  tells  us  not  simply  that  light  began  to 
be  visible,  but  it  asserts  that  light  began  to  be; 
and  it  seems  certain  that  the  majestic  language 
here  attributed  to  Elohim  is  too  lofty  and  sublime 
to  be  applied  to  so  comparatively  unimportant  an 
event  as  the  scattering  of  the  mists  and  clouds. 
Here  comparatively  late  discoveries,  or  at  least 
applications,    of    scientific    knowledge   come    for- 
ward to  solve  the  problem.     We  know  that  light 
was  once  supposed  to  be  a  distinct  element  or 
substance ;  but  now  it  is  believed  to  be  simply  a 
mode   or  condition  of   matter.      Thus  it  is  now 
known    that    the   light-giving  qualities  of   many 
bodies  are  due  to  their  condition  of  incandescence. 
It  is  certainly  known  that  light  is  not  entirely  de- 
pendent on  the  sun.      No  one  who  is  at  all  familiar 
with  the  subject  now  doubts  that  there  is  a  kind 
and  degree  of  light  apart  from  the  sun ;  and  it  is  cer- 
tain that  this  chemical  or  cosmical  light  possesses 
some  qualities  conducive  to  the  growth  of  vegeta- 
tion.     It  is  beyond  any  question  true  that  "  any 
solid  body  can  be  rendered  incandescent  by  being 


2  2  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

heated  up  to  between  700°  and  800°  Fahrenheit," 
and  liquids  also  which  are  capable  of  being-  heated 
up  to  the  required  degree  emit  light.  We  know 
also  that  fire-flies,  certain  kinds  of  wood,  and  still 
other  substances  in  their  normal  condition,  throw 
out  light.  We  know,  indeed,  that  there  are  many 
theories  as  to  the  phenomenon  of  light,  but  much 
connected  with  it  is  still  wrapped  in  mystery.  It 
travels  much  faster  than  sound.  When  a  cannon 
is  fired  at  a  distance  we  first  see  the  flash  and  then 
later  hear  the  sound.  Light  travels  186,000  miles 
a  second,  or  more  than  a  million  times  faster  than 
sound.  It  therefore  takes  the  light  of  the  sun 
eight  minutes  to  travel  from  the  sun  to  the  earth. 
Light  travels  farther  as  well  as  faster  than  sound ; 
in  proof  of  this  statement  is  the  familiar  fact 
that  we  often  see  lightning  so  far  off  that  we 
cannot  hear  the  thunder  which  accompanies  it  at 
the  point  of  its  origin.  But  much  as  we  know  of 
it,  it  still  has  its  mysteries.  The  Pythagorean 
and  Newtonian  theory  w^as  that  light  w^as  trans- 
mitted to  the  eye  by  the  emission  of  small  parti- 
cles of  luminous  matter.  This  is  called  the  emis- 
sion corpuscular  theory.  The  earlier  theory  made 
light  an  attenuated,  imponderable  substance ;  the 
undulatory  theory  makes  light  to  be  propagated 
by  the  vibrations  of  matter  called  ether.  These 
theories  were  long  rivals,  but  the  imdulatory 
theory  has  completely  triumphed  over  the  other. 

Professor  Dana  affirms  that  the  wave  lengths 
in  the  vibration  of  molecular  force  have  been  as- 


IVAS    THERE   LIGHT  BEFORE    THE   SUN?     23 

certained.  He  also  reminds  us  that  the  hiws  of 
heat  and  of  electrical  and  chemical  action  are  so 
involved  with  those  of  light  that  all  these  condi- 
tions are  convertible  and  one  in  molecular  origin. 
The  nebular  hypothesis  of  La  Place,  who  stood 
second  to  none  but  Newton  in  the  great  science 
of  mathematical  astronomy,  asserts  that  the  con- 
densation of  the  originally  void,  dark,  gaseous 
chaos  would  be  accompanied  by  intense  molecular 
or  chemcial  activity,  and  so  would  assuredly  emit 
light.  Infidelity  called  Moses  a  blunderer  and 
the  Bible  a  fraud  for  affirming  that  there  was 
light  before  the  sun ;  and  now  all  the  scientists 
declare  that  this  very  result  must  have  occurred. 
Moses  was  no  scientist;  he  lived  in  an  age  when, 
nothing  was  known  of  molecular  activity.  He 
never  heard  of  Newton  or  La  Place ;  he  could  not 
have  understood  the  nebular  hypothesis  if  he  had 
heard  of  it.  How  came  he  to  anticipate  the  con- 
clusions of  modern  science?  God  taught  him;  he 
was  inspired  of  the  Almighty.  Let  infidelity  be 
dumb ;  let  it  hide  its  empty  head.  God  taught 
Moses,  and  Moses  teaches  the  scientists  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  In  medicine,  as  in  astron- 
omy, Moses  is  abreast  of  the  science  of  to-day. 
Regarding  all  sanitary  laws,  the  medical  profes- 
sion of  to-day  is  only  struggling  up  to  the  point 
reached  by  Moses  ages  ago.  Who  taught  Moses? 
The  Almighty.  How  came  the  cosmogony  of 
Moses  to  be  right,  according  to  the  latest  dicta  of 
science,  while  the  cosmogonies  of  all  heathen  na- 


24  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFETCULTIES. 

tions  excite  the  laughter  of  all  scientific  men  to- 
day? There  stands  God.  It  is  high  time  for  a 
shallow  atheism  to  be  entirely  silent,  or  to  speak 
with  great  modesty.  Let  all  believers  in  divine 
revelation  rejoice  in  God's  Word,  the  glorious  old 
Bible,  which  God  is  magnifying  in  the  halls  of 
scientific  learning,  in  the  homes  of  devout  be- 
lievers, and  in  the  churches  of  Jesus  Christ 
throughout  the  world! 


II. 

WAS   THE   WORLD   MADE  IN   SIX   DAYS? 


II. 

WAS   THE  WORLD    MADE    IN  SIX    DAYS? 

In  Genesis,  the  first  chapter  and  the  fifth  verse, 
our  attention  is  called  to  the  first  day  in  the  his- 
tory of  Creation.  In  the  same  verse  we  are  told 
that  God  called  the  light  day,  and  the  darkness 
night.  We  need  not  be  surprised  that  God  gave 
names  to  the  things  which  He  had  created.  The 
names  given  to  things  by  us  express  the  impres- 
sion which  they  have  made  upon  our  minds ;  but 
the  names  given  by  God  express  the  nature  of 
the  things  to  which  they  are  given.  It  seems  cer- 
tain that  God,  in  naming  the  day  and  the  night,  had 
reference  to  their  phenomena  rather  than  to  their 
duration.  The  names  were  not  for  the  benefit  of 
men  when  first  given,  as  there  were  no  human 
beings  then  to  make  use  of  the  names  which  God 
gave ;  but  these  names  were  rather  a  declaration 
of  the  qualities  or  nature  of  the  things  to  which 
they  were  applied.  It  is  still  true  that,  in  a  real 
sense,  "words  are  things."  We  may  be  abso- 
lutely certain  that  there  was  a  significance  in  the 
words  employed  by  God,  which  made  it  fitting 
that  they  should  be  applied  to  the  things  which 
He  made.  We  cannot,  for  a  moment,  suppose 
that    the   name  given  to  one   object  could  with 


28  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

equal  propriety  have  been  given  to  another.  But 
it  must  be  admitted  that  there  is  still  much  uncer- 
tainty as  to  the  etymology  of  the  words  which 
God  employed.  The  Hebrew  word  translated 
day  is  yom,  and  the  word  translated  night  is  la- 
ycla.  These  names,  let  it  be  borne  in  mind,  were 
descriptions  of  nature  rather  than  measures  of 
time. 

Some  scholars  suggest  that  yoin  expresses  "  the 
tumult,  stir,  and  business  of  the  day. "  Those  who 
give  it  this  meaning  probably  connect  it  with  the 
word  yai)i^  which  depicts  the  boiling  or  foaming 
of  the  sea.  They  make  layela  refer  to  "  the  yell- 
ing or  howling  of  wild  beasts  at  night,"  and  so 
connect  it  with  the  Latin  iilnlarc.  But  probably 
Gesenius  and  others  are  more  nearly  correct  in 
deriving  the  word  yoni  from  a  root  meaning  *'  to 
be  warm,  to  glow  with  heat."  This  derivation 
makes  it  analogous  to  the  Arabic,  yahina^  to  glow 
with  anger.  It  has  been  well  said  that  in  a  sultry 
climate,  like  that  of  the  East,  this  would  be  a  suit- 
able description  of  the  day  to  distinguish  it  from 
the  night.  Gesenius  and  other  Hebrew  scholars 
associate  the  word  for  night  with  the  rare  Hebrew 
root  /;//,  meaning  to  roll  up;  and  the  idea  sug- 
gested is  that  night  rolls  up  or  wraps  all  things  in 
the  curtains  of  obscurity  and  darkness.  We  may 
be  quite  sure  that  there  was  entire  appropriate- 
ness in  the  terms  applied  by  God  to  the  day  and 
the  night.  God  has  a  reason,  doubtless,  for  every 
name  He  gives  and  for  every  act  He  performs ;  and 


IV AS    THE    WORLD   MADE   IN   SIX  DAYS?    29 

whether  or  not  we  fully  understand  the  etymology 
of  these  words,  we  may  be  sure  that  they  point  out 
the  distinguishing  peculiarities  of  the  objects  to 
which  they  are  applied.  A  similar  remark  will 
apply  to  the  names  given  to  the  heavens  and  the 
earth,  to  the  sea  and  to  the  dry  land,  and  to  all 
the  other  objects  named  in  the  account  of  Crea- 
tion. 

We  read  in  the  latter  part  of  this  fifth  verse, 
"  And  the  evening  and  the  morning  were  the  first 
day. "  The  more  literal  translation  is,  "  And  even- 
ing was,  and  morning  was,  day  one. "  Because  the 
darkness  preceded  the  light,  the  evening  is  prob- 
ably mentioned  first ;  and  it  is  likely  that  for  this 
reason  the  Jews  began  their  day  of  twenty-four 
hours  from  the  evening.  There  has  always  been 
some  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  exact  mean- 
ing of  the  language  here  used.  Some  have 
affirmed  that  we  have  here  an  ordinary  solar  day 
of  twenty-four  hours.  This,  it  is  claimed,  is  the 
natural  meaning  of  the  language  here  employed ; 
and  the  words  of  the  fourth  commandment  are 
quoted  to  show  that  here  we  have  simply  an  ordi- 
nary astronomical  day.  But  some  who  so  affirm 
reckon  the  day  from  daybreak  to  daybreak,  while 
others  reckon  it  from  sunset  to  sunset. 

Meaning   of  "One." 

Let  us  look  carefully  into  the  Scriptural  use  of 
the  two  words  "  day  one. "  Let  us  entirely  free  our 
minds  from  any  real  or  supposed  necessity,  as  the 


30  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

result  of  modern  scientific  discovery  in  geology  or 
any  other  science,  to  understand  the  word  "day" 
as  meaning  a  period  of  indefinite  duration.  Let 
us,  without  prejudice  one  way  or  the  other,  get 
the  heart  meaning  and  the  Scriptural  usage  of 
these  two  words  translated  in  our  version  "  first 
day"  and  more  literally  "day  one."  The  two 
words  in  Hebrew  are  j^;;z,  day,  and  ahad^  one. 
The  numeral  "  one  "  is  several  times  used  in  Scrip- 
ture when  clearly  it  means  certain^  peculiar,  special, 
unique.  It  is  in  these  passages  used  in  the  sense 
of  the  Latin  quidani.  Thus  we  have  the  word  in 
Daniel  viii.  3 :  "  Then  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes,  and 
saw,  and,  behold,  there  stood  before  the  river  a 
ram  which  had  two  horns,  and  the  two  horns  were 
high,  but  one  was  higher  than  the  other,  and  the 
higher  came  up  last. "  The  word  ahadis.  certainly 
used  here  to  describe  a  ram  of  a  peculiar  charac- 
ter; that  is,  one  having  two  horns  of  unequal 
height,  and  so  a  certain,  a  peculiar,  a  unique  ram. 
So  in  Ezekiel  vii.5,  it  is  used  of  an  evil,  an  only 
evil ;  that  is,  an  evil  of  an  unwonted  character,  an 
evil  of  a  peculiar  nature.  In  Solomon's  Song 
vi.9,  we  have  the  words:  "  My  dove,  my  undefiled 
is  but  one,  she  is  the  only  one  of  her  mother. "  It 
is  quite  certain  that  in  this  passage  also  the  word 
"  one"  expresses  the  idea  of  something  peculiar, 
something  especially  distinguished,  something 
quite  out  of  the  ordinary  character  of  things  and 
persons  of  the  same  general  class.  It  would  be 
easy  to  give  still  other  references  illustrative  of 


IVAS    THE    WORLD   MADE   IX   SIX  DAYS?    31 

the  same  meaning-  of  the  word.  Now,  apply  this 
Scripture  use  of  the  word  one  to  the  case  in  hand, 
and  the  meaning,  will  be,  "  And  evening  was, 
and  morning  was,  a  peculiar  or  unique  day. "  Thus 
we  see  that  the  evening  and  the  morning  here 
mentioned  were,  according  to  this  explanation,  a 
certain,  a  peculiar,  a  unique,  and  not  an  ordinary 
day.  This  so-called  day,  as  we  shall  later  more 
fully  see,  constituted  an  epoch,  an  era,  a  period  of 
time  of  indefinite  duration. 

Scientific   and    Other  Considerations. 

AVe  shall  soon  take  up  the  Scripture  use  of  the 
word  day;  but  there  are  a  few  antecedent  con- 
siderations which  ought  to  receive  our  passing  at- 
tention. Geology  has  long  declared  that  the  earth 
required  vast  epochs  to  bring  it  into  its  present 
condition ;  but  it  is  not  proposed  to  burden  this 
article  with  geological  technicalities,  or  any  oth- 
er form  of  wearisome  scientific  terminology.  It 
may,  however,  be  safely  affirmed  that  science 
probably  shows  that  the  order  of  creative  de- 
velopment was  that  of  the  Mosaic  record,  first 
plants,  thfen  fish  and  fowl,  and  finally  animals 
and  man.  If  we  were  to  go  carefully  into  the 
testimony  of  rocks  and  were  to  consider  that  testi- 
mony as  admissible,  it  would  certainly  be  strongly 
in  favor  of  an  era  of  indefinite  duration  rather 
than  a  day  of  twenty-four  hours,  an  era  perhaps 
of  thousands,  possibly  of  millions,  of  years.  In- 
deed, without  any  special  scientific  knowledge  it 


32  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

can  readily  be  seen  that  the  works  of  the  different 
days  of  Creation  could  not  be  put  into  the  compass 
of  days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  except  by  con- 
tinuous miracles  of  the  most  stupendous  character. 
That  God  could  do  this,  no  one  who  rightly  be- 
lieves in  His  omniscience  and  omnipotence  can  for 
a  moment  doubt;  but  that  God  did  this  is  open  to 
doubt  so  strong  as  to  be  virtually  a  denial.  Such 
enormous  haste  as  the  hypothesis  of  days  of 
twenty-four  hours  would  necessitate  is  not  in  har- 
mony with  God's  methods,  as  we  see  them  in  Cre- 
ation or  providence.  Take,  for  example,  the  work 
of  the  sixth  day.  On  that  day  the  animals  were 
created ;  Adam  was  made ;  the  animals  were  col- 
lected together  and  named  as  they  passed  in  re- 
view before  Adam ;  on  that  day  he  was  cast  into 
a  deep  sleep  by  God,  and  a  rib  was  taken  from 
his  side,  was  fashioned  into  a  woman,  and  she 
was  presented  to  Adam.  If  these  were  days  of 
twenty-four  hours  each,  then  all  that  is  recorded 
in  the  first  five  verses  of  the  first  chapter  of  Gene- 
sis took  place  in  twenty-four  hours.  Who  can  be- 
lieve it?  No  one  doubts  that  God  could\\'<\.\Q  done 
this,  but  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  God  did 
all  this  in  that  time.  If  these  were  days  of 
twenty-four  hours  each,  then  the  world  could  not 
have  been  more  than  one  hundred  and  forty-four 
hours  older  than  man ;  and  if  he  were  created  in 
the  early  part  of  the  sixth  day,  the  world  was  not 
even  that  much  older  than  man.  Is  this  conceiv- 
able?    It  is  so  only,  as  already  remarked,  by  sup- 


IVAS    THE    WORLD   MADE   EV   SEX  DAYS?    ZZ 

posing  continuous  miracles  of  the  most  stupendous 
character ;  but  in  the  economy  of  God,  so  far  as 
we  can  learn  His  ways,  He  has  always  kept  the 
miraculous  displays  of  His  power  within  econom- 
ical limits.  The  length  of  the  seventh  day  de- 
termines the  length  of  the  other  six;  but  most 
commentators  consider  that  God's  Sabbatic  day 
extends  from  Creation  to  the  present  hour.  Must 
not  then  the  other  six  days  be  days  of  indefinite 
duration?  If  the  six  days  mentioned  in  Exodus 
XX.  1 1  are  days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  so  must 
the  seventh  day  be  one  of  twenty-four  hours ;  but 
God  is  represented  as  having  rested  on  that  day 
from  His  creative  labors.  If  that  day  is  still  con- 
tinued, and  so  is  one  of  indefinite  duration,  are 
we  not  justified  in  affirming  that  the  other  six 
were  also  periods  of  undefined  length? 

Attention  has  often  been  called  to  the  fact  that 
many  heathen  cosmogonies  give  indirect  confir- 
mation to  the  view  here  presented.  Egyptian, 
Persian,  Indian,  and  Etruscan  legends  are  named 
by  different  writers  on  this  subject,  and  while  not 
of  authority  in  themselves,  they  may  be  quoted 
as  showing  that  this  idea  was  widely  diffused, 
^lany  Christians  can  remember  how  a  generation 
ago  their  simple  Christian  faith  was  rudely 
shocked  by  scientific  affirmations  that  the  world 
was  not  made  in  six  days  of  twenty-four  hours 
each.  The  writer  well  remembers  that  in  his 
boyhood  his  faith  was  greatly  disturbed,  and  for  a 
time  almost  wrecked,  by  statements  of  men  older 
3 


34  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

and  wiser  than  himself,  men  who  read  widely  in 
the  scientific  literature  of  the  times,  and  who 
affirmed  that  the  statements  of  the  Bible  were 
disproved  by  the  absolutely  conclusive  demonstra- 
tions of  science.  He  was  not  able  to  refute  these 
statements ;  he  thought  the  Bible  taught  that  the 
world  was  made  in  six  days,  of  twenty-four  hours 
each.  He  thought  he  must  hold  on  to  the  twen- 
ty-four-hour theory  or  reject  the  Bible.  Thank 
God !  we  now  see  that  neither  science  nor  Scripture 
teaches  that  the  world  was  made  in  six  days  of 
twenty-four  hours  each !  To  believe  the  Bible  is 
one  thing,  but  to  believe  all  the  interpretations 
which  some  men  choose  to  give  the  Bible  is  quite 
another  thing. 

Scripture  Use  of  the  Word  "Day." 

Now,  let  us  look  at  the  Scripture  use  of  the 
word  "day."  Perhaps  the  highest  Hebrew  au- 
thority favors  the  etymology  which  refers  the 
word  to  a  root  meaning  "  to  be  warm,  to  be  hot, 
to  glow  with  heat,"  as  already  suggested.  If  this 
origin  of  the  word  be  correct,  it  might  refer  to  the 
glowing  or  heated  periods  through  which  the  world 
passed  in  its  successive  developments.  But  the 
purpose  at  this  point  is  simply  to  refer  to  the 
Scriptural  use  of  the  word ;  thus  Scripture  will  in- 
terpret Scripture.  Nothing  is  more  certain  than 
that  the  word  yoni^  day,  is  repeatedly  used  in  the 
Scripture  when  reference  is  made  to  epochs,  eons, 


jrAS    THE    WORLD   MADE   IN   SIX  DAYS?    35 

periods  of  indefinite  length.  We  have  the  first  in- 
stance in  this  immediate  connection  in  the  record 
of  Creation  itself;  the  word  is  found  in  Genesis 
ii.4.  There  we  read:  "  These  are  the  generations 
of  the  heavens  and  of  the  earth,  when  tlicy  were 
created,  in  the  day  (bcyoni)  that  the  Lord  God  made 
the  earth  and  the  heavens. "  Here  the  word  "  day" 
is  clearly  not  a  solar  day ;  it  is  most  certainly  used 
to  cover  the  entire  period  of  Creation.  This  is  the 
first  time  the  word  occurs  after  the  history  of  the 
day  of  the  creative  week,  and  it  will  be  admitted 
by  all  that  it  is  here  applied  to  the  entire  period. 
It  would  seem  as  if  there  were  a  providential  pur- 
pose to  show  us  at  this  point  that  the  word  "  day" 
in  the  account  of  Creation  meant  an  epoch,  and 
not  a  period  of  twenty-four  hours.  It  is  strange 
that  many  of  the  readers  of  the  Bible  seem  to 
have  overlooked  this  verse,  when  they  have  in- 
sisted that  the  six  days  of  Creation  were  days  of 
twent3'-four  hours  each.  It  is  astonishing  that 
traditional  interpretations  often  close  the  eyes  of 
even  scholarly  commentators  to  the  plain  reading 
of  God's  Word.  The  Hebrew  Scriptures  gener- 
ally clearly  show  that  the  word  "  day"  often  de- 
notes a  period  of  past  or  future  time  without 
limit.  In  Isaiah  xxx.  8,  we  read,  "  Now  go  .  .  . 
and  note  it  in  a  book,  that  it  may  be  for  the  time 
to  come  for  ever  and  ever."  The  phrase  "  time  to 
come,"  as  seen  in  the  margin  of  our  Bibles,  liter- 
ally means,  "the  latter  day."  Nothing  could  be 
clearer  than  that  the  word  "  day"  here  refers  to  an 


S^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

indefinite  period.  In  Job  xviii.  20  we  read, 
"  They  that  come  after  him  shall  be  astonied  at 
his  day.''  Here  the  word  "day"  stands  for  the 
whole  period  of  a  man's  life.  In  Isaiah  ii.  11  we 
have  "...  the  Lord  alone  shall  be  exalted  in 
that  day,"  and  in  the  next  verse  we  have  a  refer- 
ence to  "the  day  of  the  Lord  of  hosts."  The 
word  day  here  clearly  means  the  time  when  God 
would  punish  His  people  for  their  sins;  it  prob- 
ably refers  to  the  captivity  in  Babylon.  This  is  a 
time  when  Jehovah  will  inflict  vengeance  on  the 
people;  a  time  is  coming  when  God's  righteous 
anger  would  be  revealed.  In  Jeremiah  xlvi.  10  we 
have  the  words,  "  the  day  of  the  Lord  God  of  hosts, 
a  day  of  vengeance."  In  Ezekiel  xxx.  3  we  read: 
"  For  the  day  is  near,  even  the  day  of  the  Lord  is 
near,  a  cloudy  day,  it  shall  be  the  time  of  the 
heathen. "  In  Zephaniah  i.  7  we  read,  "  For  the 
day  of  the  Lord  is  at  hand. "  In  Joel  ii.  31  we 
have  the  words:  "The  sun  shall  be  turned  into 
darkness,  and  the  moon  into  blood,  before  the 
great  and  the  terrible  day  of  the  Lord  come."  In 
all  these  passages  a  period  of  trial  on  the  part  of 
the  x^eople,  and  of  righteous  judgment  on  the  part 
of  God  is  announced.  In  Judges  xviii.  i  the  word 
days  is  used  for  a  period  of  time  in  history,  and  in 
Ecclesiastes  xii.  3  we  have  the  expression,  "  In 
the  day  when  the  keepers  of  the  house  shall  trem- 
ble," where  the  w^ord  day  is  used  for  old  age.  We 
use  the  word  often  with  that  meaning  now.  We 
still  speak  of  "his  day,"  "my  day,"  "your  day," 


IF  AS    THE    WORLD   MADE   IN   SIX  DAYS?    37 

referring  to  periods  of  time  and  to  sections  of 
one's  age. 

There  is  one  very  striking  passage  to  which  at- 
tention should  be  called.  In  Zechariah  xiv.  6,  7 
reference  is  made  probably  to  the  time  of  our 
Lord's  coming,  and  to  the  entire  Gospel  dispensa- 
tioi' ;  the  words  are :  "  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  in 
that  day,  that  the  light  shall  not  be  clear,  nor 
dark,  but  it  shall  be  one  day  which  shall  be 
known  to  the  Lord,  not  day  nor  night."  The  day 
to  which  reference  is  here  made  is  certainly  a  day 
unique  in  I'.ie  world's  history.  It  is  one  of  God's 
da3^s,  not  one  of  man's  days.  It  is  such  a  day  as 
distinguishes  it  from  all  of  man's  civil  or  solar 
days.  It  is  a  special  time,  a  unique  period,  known 
as  the  day  of  the  Lord.  Reference  might  be 
made  also  to  Psalm  xc.  4 ;  xcv.  8  ;  Isaiah  xlix.  8 ; 
2  Corinthians  vi.  2;  John  ix.  4;  i  Thessalonians 
V.  2  ;  2  Peter  iii.  10;  Hebrews  xiii.  8;  and  in  2  Peter 
iii.  8  we  have  the  words :  "  But,  beloved,  be  not 
ignorant  of  this  one  thing,  that  one  day  is  with  the 
Lord  as  a  thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as 
one  day."  Unfortunately,  many  of  the  Lord's 
children  have  seemed  to  be  ignorant  of  this  very 
one  thing. 

Prof.  Tayler  Lewis  is  authority  for  the  general 
statement  that  Scripture  clearly  shows  that  there 
are  days  or  eras  which  God  supernaturally  divided 
by  His  own  power  in  the  creation  of  the  world, 
and  that  there  are  other  days  concerning  which 
God  said,  "  Let  the  sun  divide  them."     These  lat- 


38  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

ter  are  the  natural,  the  solar  days,  measured  off 
by  the  returning  course  of  nature.  Thus  we  have 
in  the  Bible  two  kinds  of  days ;  the  one  kind  is 
directly  God-made,  the  other  is  indirectly  sun- 
made.  Nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  the 
Bible  does  not  teach  that  the  days  of  Creation 
were  days  of  twenty-four  hours.  We  ought  not 
to  let  any  affirmation  to  that  effect  disturb  our 
faith.  We  ought  to  be  calm,  truthful,  and  joyous 
in  the  Lord  and  in  the  word  of  His  truth.  Some 
of  the  scaffolds  which  men  have  erected  around 
the  temple  of  revelation  are  falling.  Let  them 
fall !  Their  disappearance  will  permit  the  divine 
temple  to  be  the  more  clearly  seen  in  its  perfect 
symmetry,  spotless  beauty,  and  divine  majesty. 
Away  with  false  interpretations,  away  with  all 
forms  of  superstition,  away  with  all  kinds  of  infi- 
delity! With  glorious  old  Isaiah,  writing  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty,  we  shall  say, 
"  The  grass  withereth,  the  flower  fadeth,  but  the 
word  of  our  God  shall  stand  forever." 


III. 

WHERE    AND    WHAT    WAS    THE    GARDEN 
OF  EDEN? 


III. 

WHERE  AND  WHAT  WAS  THE  GARDEN 
OF    EDEN? 

The  Scriptural  account  of  the  Garden  of  Eden 
is  found  in  the  second  chapter  of  Genesis,  begin- 
ning with  the  eighth  verse  and  going  to  the  end 
of  the  seventeenth.  The  question  as  to  the  loca- 
tion and  character  of  the  Garden  of  Eden  has 
always  been  one  of  fascinating  interest.  The 
writer  of  the  Book  of  Genesis,  in  harmony  with 
the  well-known  character  of  Hebrew  composition, 
having  carried  his  subject  to  a  convenient  resting- 
place,  often  reverts  to  a  point  already  passed  over. 
So,  in  giving  an  account  of  the  Garden  of  Eden, 
he  goes  back  to  a  time  antecedent  to  man's  ap- 
pearance on  the  earth.  It  is  evident,  from  this 
account,  that  the  garden  was  fully  prepared  some 
time — how  long,  of  course,  we  do  not  know — be- 
fore the  intended  occupant  was  prepared  to  pos- 
sess it.  A  wonderful  name  is  Eden!  It  is  music 
on  the  tongue  as  it  is  pronounced,  and  its  sound 
thrills  the  heart.  It  awakens  the  most  delicious 
memories,  and  it  suggests  the  most  glorious  proph- 
ecies. The  word  translated  garden  properly 
means  an  enclosure,  from  a  word  meaning  to 
fence  or  to  protect.      In  the  Scptuagint  it  is  usu- 


42  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

ally  rendered  Paradise,  but  this  is  a  word  neither 
of  Greek  nor  Hebrew  origin.  It  is  found  in 
Xenophon's  "  Cyropsedia"  and  other  of  his  writ- 
ings, about  B.C.  400.  The  Greek  translation  of 
the  Bible  took  this  word  as  the  translation  of  the 
garden  which  the  Creator  prepared  for  innocent 
man.  The  word  has  been  generally  supposed  to 
be  Persian,  from  which  language  Xenophon  de- 
rived it.  In  that  language  it  represents  a  park, 
a  pleasure  garden,  a  woodland  enclosure,  pro- 
tected by  a  wall,  abundantly  watered,  and  abound- 
ing with  fruit-trees,  flowers,  and  other  objects  of 
beauty.  The  word  finally  came  to  be  applied  to 
any  delightful  region,  and  was  in  this  sense  intro- 
duced into  the  later  Hebrew  in  the  form  of  par- 
dees.  In  our  version  it  is  sometimes  rendered 
forest  and  sometimes  orchard  and  garden.  Prob- 
ably the  derivation  should  be  carried  farther  back 
than  the  Persian. 

The  word  is  certainly  found  in  the  Armenian 
tongue,  one  of  the  oldest  languages  of  one  of  the 
oldest  people  in  the  world.  In  this  language  it  is 
compounded  of  two  words,  meaning  edible  grains 
or  herbs.  The  Armenians  frequently  use  the 
word  as  applied  to  a  garden  adjoining  a  dwelling; 
but  it  is  almost  certain  that  the  origin  of  the  word 
goes  back  to  the  Sanscrit,  paradeesha,  standing  for 
a  region  of  surpassing  beauty.  The  word  became 
finally  a  metaphor  to  express  the  idea  of  exquisite 
delight,  and  so  it  was  used  not  only  for  the  abode 
of  our  first  parents  in  their  innocence  and  bliss, 


WHERE  AND    WHAT    WAS  EDEN?  43 

but  as  a  figurative  name  for  Heaven,  the  home  of 
the  blessed.  In  this  sense  it  is  several  times  used 
in  the  New  Testament.  The  word  Eden  is  there- 
fore one  of  the  most  venerable  and  beloved  names 
in  geography.  The  Greek  word  Jicdoiic  is  nearly 
identical  in  sense  as  well  as  in  sound.  It  ought  to 
be  constantly  borne  in  mind  that  Eden  was  a  tract 
of  country,  of  which  part,  and  as  we  may  well  be- 
lieve the  most  beautiful  part,  was  the  Paradise, 
park,  organ,  garden  of  all  delight.  We  ought  not 
to  suppose  that  Eden  is  identical  with  the  Garden 
of  Eden.  They  are  to  be  constantly  distinguished 
if  we  are  to  have  an  intelligent  conception  of  the 
Biblical  narrative. 

The  Allegorical  Interpretation. 

In  almost  all  ages  of  the  church  there  have  been 
writers  who  interpreted  the  Biblical  narrative  of 
Eden  as  a  mere  allegory.  The  same  remark  will 
apply  to  their  interpretation  of  the  whole  story  of 
the  Creation  and  Fall  of  Man.  Many  of  these 
allegorical  interpretations  are  beautiful  in  them- 
selves, and  are  suggestive  of  important  truths, 
although  they  are  not  adequate  interpretations  of 
the  Biblical  story.  In  harmony  with  this  method 
of  exposition,  Philo  made  Paradise  the  governing 
faculties  of  the  soul.  The  four  rivers  described 
in  the  Book  of  Genesis  he  made  four  virtues: 
Prudence,  temperance,  courage,  and  justice. 
Origen,  under  the  general  influence  of  this 
method,  makes  Paradise,  Heaven;    the  trees,  an- 


44  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

gels ;  and  the  rivers,  wisdom.  Other  mystical  in- 
terpreters have  given  different  significations  to 
the  various  features  of  the  Biblical  narrative,  but 
have  still  retained  the  chief  features  of  this  alle- 
gorical method.  A  few  more  heroic  interpreters 
have  cut  the  Gordian  knot  by  declaring  that  the 
entire  story  is  the  spurious  interpolation  of  a  com- 
paratively late  age.  Luther  believed  that  the 
garden  remained  under  the  guardianship  of  an- 
gels until  the  time  of  the  flood,  and  that  so  great 
was  the  convulsion  of  nature  incident  to  the  flood 
that  all  traces  of  Eden  were  obliterated.  But  the 
narrative  in  Genesis  seems  clearly  to  imply  that 
at  the  time  of  the  historian  the  countries  and  riv- 
ers described  were  still  in  existence.  That  im- 
pression grows  constantly  upon  the  mind  of  the 
careful  reader  of  the  Biblical  story ;  he  strongly 
feels  that  the  description  of  the  garden  is  vividly 
present  to  the  mind  of  the  writer,  and  that  the 
garden  was  capable  of  being  visited  by  him  and 
his  readers. 

Traditional    Edens. 

Almost  all  nations  have  had  the  idea  of  a  ter- 
restrial Paradise.  The  conception  of  Eden,  as  in 
some  sense  the  Garden  of  God,  retains  its  hold  not 
only  on  the  minds  of  Hebrew  prophets  and  poets, 
but  in  the  hearts  of  poets,  historians,  and  philoso- 
phers among  all  the  nations  with  whose  records  we 
have  become  familiar.  Arabian  legends  tell  us 
of  a  garden  on  the  summit  of  a  great  and  glorious 


WHERE  AND    WHAT   WAS  EDEN?  45 

mountain  inaccessible  to  men.     Hindu  traditions 
have  their  Garden  of  Eden  on  tlic  top  of  a  moun- 
tain  shaped  like  the  seed-cup  of  the  sacred  lotus. 
In  this  blessed  abode  of  divinity  is  the  holy  grove 
of   Indra;  there  also  is  the  Jarabu  tree,   whose 
fruit  fed  the  waters  of  the  Jambu  River,  waters 
which  impart  immortal  life,  beauty,  and  glory  to 
all  who  drink  thereof.     The  Chinese  have  their 
enchanted  garden  in  one  of  the  high  ranges  of  the 
Houanlun  Mountains.     The   Medo- Persians   had 
theirs  also.     The  Greeks  had  their  Hespendes, 
su<ro-estive  of  innocence,  beauty,  and  immortality. 
Anthese  traditions  are  but  echoes  of  the  Hebrew 
story      They  bear  eloquent  testimony  to  the  real- 
ity of  the  Biblical  narrative.     It  is  difficult,  if  not 
impossible,  to  account  for  the  universality  of  this 
belief,  except  on  the  hypothesis  of  the  historicity 
of  the  thing  so  widely  believed. 

The  Location  of  Eden. 
Where  were  the  tract  of  Eden  and  the  Garden 
of  Paradise  in  Eden?     Is  it  possible  for  us  to  an- 
swer  these  questions  with  any  degree  of  certainty. 
In  making  this  search,  a  starting-point  is  found  m 
the  second  chapter  of  Genesis.     This  is  an  artless, 
child-like,  and  altogether  charming   description. 
In  this  respect  it  is  in  harmony  with  ail  the  narra- 
tives of  the  primitive  Hebrew  Scriptures.     Some 
would   interpret   the    expression,    "  Eastward   m 
Eden,"  in  the  eighth  verse  of  the  second  chapter 
of  Genesis,  to  mean  eastward  of  the  place  of  the 


46  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

writer.  We  may  ask,  Where  was  that  writer's 
standing-point?  Perhaps  in  Palestine.  In  all 
ag-es  and  lands  the  religion  of  the  rising  sun  is 
poetically  supposed  to  be  of  surpassing  beauty. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  cradle  of  the  race  did  lie 
eastward  to  the  land  of  Israel.  But  perhaps  the 
phrase,  "  Eastward  in  Eden,"  means  in  the  eastern 
part  of  the  tract  of  Eden ;  this  seems  to  be  the 
most  natural  interpretation  of  the  phrase.  We 
also  have  the  description  of  the  river  which 
watered  the  garden,  and  its  division  into  four  dis- 
tinct streams,  to  guide  us  in  our  discussion.  It  is 
well  knowm  that  few  questions  are  so  difficult  of 
a  satisfactory  solution  as  the  location  of  Eden. 
Its  discussion  has  ever  temptingly  invited,  and 
has  often  utterly  baffled,  the  investigation  of 
scholars.  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa  have  been 
carefully  examined  to  find  this  garden  of  beauty. 
It  has  been  said  that  from  "  China  to  the  Canary 
Isles,  from  the  Mountains  of  the  Moon  to  the 
coasts  of  the  Baltic,  no  locality  which  in  the 
slightest  degree  corresponded  to  the  description 
of  the  first  home  of  the  human  race  has  been  left 
unexamined."  Eden  has  been  sought  for  all  the 
way  from  Siberia  to  the  South  Sea  Islands.  Hasse 
gratified  his  national  pride  by  placing  it  on  the 
shore  of  the  Baltic.  Rudbeck,  who  was  a  Swede, 
located  Eden  in  Scandinavia.  The  Greeks  placed 
the  Garden  of  Hesperides  in  the  extreme  west, 
and  others  would  have  it,  as  we  have  seen,  in 
some  of  the  ranges  of   the  glorious    Himalayan 


WHERE  AND    WHAT    ]VAS  EDEN?  47 

Mountains,  near  the  rei^ion  which  traditionally, 
and  perhaps  correctly,  is  called  the  cradle  of  the 
race  and  the  birthplace  of  m3'thical  gods  and  his- 
torical men.  Some  have  given  up  the  quest  as 
utterly  hopeless.  They  put  the  solution  of  this 
problem  in  the  same  category  with  that  of  per- 
petual motion,  the  quadrature  of  the  circle,  and 
the  interpretation  of  unfulfilled  prophecy.  Two 
points,  however,  are  absolutely  clear  in  this 
whole  discussion.  We  must  find  a  river  which  is 
divided  as  one  current,  or,  as  a  river  system,  into 
four  streams,  two  of  which  are  the  Tigris  and  the 
Euphrates.  The  identification  of  these  two  rivers 
with  the  Hiddekel  and  the  Phrat,  has  never  been 
disputed.  But  what  rivers  shall  stand  for  the  Pison 
and  the  Gihon?  It  may  be  said  that  investigators 
here  usually  divide  themselves  into  two  great 
classes — those  who  place  the  Garden  of  Eden  be- 
low the  junction  of  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates, 
and  those  who  seek  it  in  the  high  tablelands  of 
Armenia.  All  other  interpretations  may  be 
readily  eliminated  from  our  problem.  Those 
theories  which  m^ake  the  Ganges,  the  Indus,  or 
the  Nile  the  rivers  described  in  the  narrative 
may  at  once  be  set  aside.  The  men  who  sug- 
gested these  theories,  as  a  rule,  deny  the  histori- 
cal reality  of  the  Biblical  description.  They  re- 
duce the  inspired  narrative  to  the  level  of  a  myth 
or  saga. 

Let  us  again  bear  in  mind  that  Eden  was  not  a 
garden,  but  the  region  or  territory  in  which  the 


48  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

garden  lay,  and  that  there  is  no  good  reason  to 
suppose  that  the  deluge  greatly  changed  the  face 
of  the  country.  As  already  suggested,  the  writer 
was  evidently  describing  a  territory  which  in  his 
day  was,  in  his  judgment,  capable  of  identifica- 
tion. Let  us  also  remember  that  the  Hebrew 
word  NaJiar  stands  not  "for  an  individual  river, 
but  for  the  river  system  of  the  country  to  which 
it  is  applied ;  and  let  us  further  bear  in  mind  that 
the  general  situation  is  clearly  fixed  by  the  rivers 
Tigris  and  Euphrates.  V/e  are  now  prepared  to 
affirm  with  these  facts  in  mind  that  Eden  was  in 
the  highlands  of  Armenia.  To  the  illustration 
of  this  statement  a  few  facts  clearly  contribute ; 
let  us  look  closely  at  these  facts.  A  careful  ex- 
amination of  the  highlands  of  Armenia,  west  of 
Mount  Ararat,  and  about  five  thousand  feet  above 
the  sea,  will  show  that  it  corresponds,  in  a  remark- 
able and  f^lscinating  degree,  to  the  description  of 
Eden  given  in  the  Book  of  Genesis.  It  is  well 
known  that,  within  a  circuit  of  a  few  miles  in  diam- 
eter in  this  general  region,  four  great  rivers 
take  their  rise ;  and  it  is  equally  well  known  that 
those  four  rivers  have  many  branches.  These 
rivers  are  the  Euphrates,  which  is  at  least  sixteen 
hundred  miles  long;  the  Tigris,  which,  there  is 
good  reason  to  believe,  is  the  Hiddekel — a  word 
which  really  signifies  "  the  rapid  Tigris" — of  Gen- 
esis, and  which  is  i,  146  miles  long  before  its  junc- 
tion with  the  Euphrates  at  Kurnah,  where  they 
form  the  Shat-el-Arab,  which  flows  on  about  one 


WHERE  AND    WHAT    WAS  EDEN?  49 

hundred  and  twenty  miles  to  the  Persian  Gulf. 
Midway  between  these  two  main  sources  of  the 
Euphrates  rises  the  Araxes,  which  flows  northeast 
for  a  thousand  miles  and  then  pours  its  waters  into 
the  Caspian  Sea.  At  no  great  distance  from  the 
Euphrates  is  the  Halys^  or  Phasis,  which  runs  a 
winding  course  northwesterly  for  seven  hundred 
miles  to  the  Black  Sea.  Two  of  these  rivers  are 
unquestionably  among  those  named  in  Genesis, 
and  the  Phasis,  or  Halys,  is  supposed  to  be  the 
Pison  of  Genesis,  and  the  Araxes,  the  Gihon.  A 
little  study  of  comparative  philology  helps  us  at 
all  these  points,  since  both  Gihon  and  Araxes 
mean  practically  the  same  thing;  both  names 
admirably  describe  the  dart-like  swiftness  of 
the  river.  All  travellers  who  have  carefully  ex- 
amined this  region  testify  that  it  is  to  this  day 
one  of  wonderful  fertility  and  of  surpassing 
beauty.  It  is  almost  certain  that  in  this  region, 
occupying  the  highest  portion  toward  the  east, 
was  the  Eden  of  the  Book  of  Genesis. 

Fruitful  Lessons. 

The  story  of  man's  occupancy  of  the  Garden  of 
Eden,  previous  to  his  fall,  is  full  of  lessons  of  the 
greatest  interest  and  importance.  Attention  has 
often  been  called  to  the  fact  that  Eden  was  a 
place  of  work.  Even  in  his  spotless  innocence 
Adam  was  commanded  to  dress  the  garden  and  to 
keep  it.  Work  is  God's  benediction  and  not  His 
malediction.  Christ  taught  us  that  work  was 
4 


50  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

His  own  normal  condition  as  well  as  that  of  His 
Father.  Horticulture  was  the  first  of  all  arts, 
and  the  first  of  all  laborers  was  a  sinless  man. 
Indolence  and  barbarism  are  ever  close  neighbors. 
The  man  or  the  nation  that  refuses  to  obey  God's 
law  of  subduing  the  earth  must  perish.  A  lazy 
man  must  greatly  try  the  patience  of  the  Infinite 
God.  The  Apostle  Paul  becomes  righteously  in- 
dignant at  the  Thessalonian  idlers,  declaring  that 
if  they  will  not  work  neither  shall  they  eat.  The 
cure  of  pauperism  is  found  in  the  opportunity  and 
the  disposition  for  hard  and  remunerative  work. 
No  law  of  political  economy  is  more  universal  and 
irresistible  than  this  law.  There  is  absolutely  no 
hope  for  the  American  Indian  except  he  be  taught 
to  work.  Few  men  die  of  overwork.  It  has  been 
well  said  that  it  is  friction  and  not  revolution  that 
destroys  machinery.  Work  is  the  inseparable  con- 
dition of  human  happiness  and  progress. 

Eden  was  the  birthplace  of  language.  Dr. 
Boardman  has  charmingly  illustrated  this  truth  in 
his  "  Creative  Week."  Speech  is  the  most  won- 
dcrfid  faculty  in  man.  It  allies  him  to  angels 
and  to  God.  It  proves  his  heirship  to  immortality 
and  divinity.  The  origin  of  language  is  one  of  the 
most  subtle  and  fascinating  of  problems.  Perhaps 
speech  came  as  a  direct  gift  from  Heaven.  It  is 
a  wonderfully  interesting  thought  that  man's  first 
recorded  act  was  the  giving  of  names  to  God's 
creatures  in  Eden.  The  study  of  words  is  really 
the  study  that  touches  life  and  thought  at  their 


WHERE  AND    WHAT    WAS  EDEN?  51 

deepest  points.  It  practically  includes  all  other 
kinds  of  study.  "Words  are  things,"  as  the  fiery 
Mirabeau  said  when  addressing-  the  stormy  French 
Assembly.  Our  Lord  has  taught  us  that  we  are 
to  be  j  adged  by  our  words.  The  gift  of  language 
is  both  sublime  and  awful.  The  tongue  may  be 
almost  angelic  or  it  may  be  altogether  Satanic. 
The  tale-bearer  or  scandal-monger  is  the  child  of 
Hades. 

Every  man  has  his  Eden.  There  is  a  time  of 
childlike  innocence  in  every  life.  Innocence  is 
not  necessarily  virtue.  Virtue  implies  the  test  of 
temptation  and  the  victory  over  temptation.  In 
Eden  man  had  his  period  of  probation,  involving 
both  permission  and  probation.  Adam  must  be 
taught  the  distinction  between  right  and  wrong. 
He  must  learn  that  he  was  a  finite  creature, 
and  that  God  alone  was  infinite.  The  prohibi- 
tion thus  given  to  Adam  was  necessary  to 
teach  him  whether  or  not  he  was  obedient.  All 
human  life  is  a  prohibition ;  there  is  a  forbidden 
something  in  every  man's  life.  Every  man  has 
his  Eden ;  every  man  is  in  some  sense  his  own 
Adam.  As  often  as  any  man  chooses  the  evil 
rather  than  the  good,  the  lower  rather  than  the 
higher  self,  and  Satan  rather  than  God,  he  has  re- 
peated Adam's  fall.  It  is  useless  to  chase  Adam 
up  and  down  the  ages ;  it  is  greatly  wise  to  make 
sure  that  we  stand  when  our  test  comes.  Thank 
God!  the  second  Adam  stood,  although  the  first 
Adam  fell.     Our  true  golden  age  is  in  the  future. 


52  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEEICULTIES. 

There  is  a  diviner  tree  of  life,  more  crystalline 
water,  a  sublimer  and  diviner  Paradise  than  that 
of  Eden.  •  The  rainbow  of  promise  spans  the 
firmament  of  Revelation,  and  the  glor}^  of  Para- 
disc  lost  is  ineffably  transcended  by  the  glory  of 
Paradise  resfained. 


IV. 

WHAT   WERE    THE    SIN  AND  SENTENCE   IN 
EDEN? 


IV. 

WHAT  WERE   THE  SIN  AND    SENTENCE 
IN  EDEN? 

The  account  of  the  temptation,  transgression, 
and  sentence  in  Eden  is  found  in  the  third  chap- 
ter of  Genesis.  We  are  safe  in  saying  that  no 
words  can  overestimate  the  happiness  of  Adam 
and  Eve  during  the  period  of  their  innocence. 
Made  in  the  image  of  God,  unassailed  by  temp- 
tation, pure  in  thought,  word,  and  act,  and  holding 
communion  with  God  as  a  man  does  with  his  dear- 
est friend,  theirs  was  celestial  joy  amid  terres 
trial  environments.  But  a  sad  experience  awaited 
them;  their  joy  was  to  end  in  sorrow,  their  in 
nocence  in  transgression,  and  their  Eden  in  Aven. 
Their  history  is  forever  after  associated  with  that 
of  a  malignant  spirit,  and  they  are  to  become  sin- 
ful, wretched,  degraded,  and  despicable. 

We  do  not  know  how  long  was  their  period  of 
joy  and  felicity ;  many  writers  have  given  us  vari- 
ous speculations  on  that  point,  but  the  Bible  gives 
us  no  information.  Somehow,  in  reading  the 
story,  one  cannot  help  feeling  that  the  period  was 
short,  although  on  that  point  no  affirmation  can 
be  made.  We  now  enter  on  the  story  of  the  in- 
troduction of  sin  and  all  its  woes.      This  chapter 


56  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

gives  US  the  tragic  scene  which  brought  Eden  to 
an  end.  The  story  is  the  saddest  which  was  ever 
told.  The  sin  of  our  first  parents  changed  Para- 
dise into  pandemonium  and  Edenic  bliss  into 
Hadean  woe. 

The  Temptation. 

Our  attention  is  directed  in  the  study  of  this 
chapter  to  the  instrument  in  the  temptation  of 
Adam  and  Eve ;  this  instrument  or  agent  is  in- 
troduced to  us  as  ^'the  serpent."  It  should,  how- 
ever, be  borne  in  mind  that  the  English  word  ser- 
pent comes  to  us  from  the  Latin  word  scTpo,  to 
creep,  and  when  we  turn  to  the  Hebrew  word,  na- 
hash,  we  see  that  it  has  no  suggestion  whatever  of 
the  motion  of  the  serpent.  The  Hebrew  word 
translated  serpent  is  one  of  extreme  difficulty.  It 
would  have  been  vastly  better  had  it  been  simply 
accurately  transliterated,  rather  than  incur  the 
liability  of  being  incorrectly  translated.  Gese- 
nius,  in  his  Hebrew  and  English  lexicon,  in- 
forms us  that  the  word  is  unused  in  Kal,  is 
onomatopoetic,  and  that  it  means  to  hiss,  to  whis- 
per, and  is  used  especially  of  the  whisperings  of 
soothsayers.  In  Piel  he  makes  it  mean  to  prac- 
tise enchantment,  to  use  sorcery,  and  also  to 
augur,  to  forbode,  to  divine.  He  gives  us  a 
second  root,  probably  signifying,  as  he  says,  to 
shine,  and  from  that  he  gives  us  the  word  mean- 
ing brass.  The  question  arises  as  to  whether  the 
latter  word  which  he  gives  is  really  a  second  root. 


THE    SIN  AND   SENTENCE   IN  EDEN.         57 

Prof.  Taylcr  Lewis,  in  his  comments  on  the  pas- 
sage in  Dr.  Lange's  Commentary,  quotes  from 
Gesenius,  and  then  adds :  "  It  (this  word)  is  far 
more  likely,  however,  to  have  had  for  its  primary 
sense  that  from  which  comes  the  secondary  mean- 
inof  of  brass,  or  rather  of  bronze — sJiining:  metal. 
This  gives,  as  the  primary,  the  idea  of  splendor, 
glistening.  The  name  may  have  been  given  to 
the  serpent  from  its  glossy,  shining  appearance, 
or  more  likely  from  the  bright  glistening  of  the 
eye.  This  would  bring  it  into  analogy  with  the 
Greek  drakon,  from  dcrkt\  dcrkoniai — sharp,  pierc- 
ing sight.  There  is  the  same  derivation  from 
the  eye  in  the  Greek  ophis,  or  from  the  general 
shining  appearance,  as  a  striking  and  beauti- 
ful, though  terrible  object.  .  .  .  The  Latin  ser- 
pens is  simply  a  generic  name — reptile.''  If  the 
word  has  really  for  its  primary  sense  the  sec- 
ondary meaning  of  brass  or  of  bronze,  then 
it  is  used  in  Scripture  in  a  variety  of  mean- 
ings. 

In  certain  of  its  uses  and  connections  it  will 
mean  to  examine  fully,  to  discover  by  trial,  or  to 
practise  divination.  The  name,  therefore,  ap- 
plies more  appropriately  to  an  intelligent  being 
than  to  a  reptile.  Following  the  Septuagint, 
most  modern  translators  have  rendered  the  origi- 
nal word  by  serpent ;  but  even  a  casual  study  of 
the  Scripture  use  of  the  word,  especially  if  Pro- 
fessor Lewis  is  correct  in  his  suggestion  regarding 
its  primary  and  secondary  senses,  shows  us  that 


58  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

it  has  many  significations.  It  is  translated  divi- 
nations and  enchantments;  it  is  also  rendered 
brass,  brazen,  chains,  fetters,  and  in  several 
places  it  is  translated  steel,  2  Samuel  xxii.  35, 
Job  XX.  24,  Psalm  xviii.  34.  It  is  also  rendered  in 
Ezekiel,  xvi.  t^C),  filthiness.  In  Job  xxvi.  13  we 
have  the  Hebrew  words  naJiasJi  bai'iacJi^  rendered 
"crooked  serpent";  but  many  commentators  af- 
firm that  the  reference  is  to  some  form  of  sea  ani- 
mal, perhaps  the  sea-horse.  The  fact  is  that  the 
word  —  if  its  primary  sense  was,  as  Professor 
Lewis  suggests,  that  from  which  comes  the  sec- 
ondary meaning  of  brass  or  bronze — is  so  broad 
and  varied  in  its  meaning  that  it  is  not  possible 
always  to  be  sure  of  its  right  translation.  The 
Septuagint  translation,  as  already  suggested,  ren- 
ders the  Hebrew  word  naJiash  by  the  Greek  word 
opJiis^  a  serpent.-  But  there  is  no  certainty  that 
this  translation  was  chosen  because  it  was  its  fixed 
meaning,  but  rather  because  it  was  difficult  to  de- 
termine its  fixed  meaning,  and  this  word,  on  the 
whole,  seemed  to  the  translators  the  most  appro- 
priate. Indeed,  they  do  not  seem  to  have  care- 
fully studied  the  original ;  and  we  have  seen  that 
they  have  not  rendered  the  word  uniformly,  but 
variously.  The  New-Testament  writers  almost 
always  quoted  from  the  Septuagint  version,  and 
they  seldom  changed  a  word  in  their  quotations. 
They,  therefore,  carried  over  this  word  opJds  into 
their  writings ;  and  thus  w^e  come,  as  already  inti- 
mated, to  have  the  English  word  serpent  as  the 


THE    SIN  AND    SENTENCE   IN  EDEN.         59 

translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  naJiasJi^  coming 
through  the  Greek  word  op  J  lis. 

A  diligent  study  of  the  narrative  in  Genesis 
shows  that  the  naJiasJi  stood  at  the  head  of  all  in- 
ferior animals.  He  walked  erect ;  he  was  endued 
with  the  power  of  speech ;  he  could  reason,  allure, 
and  persuade.  Adam  had  named  the  animals, 
perhaps,  according  to  their  distinguishing  charac- 
teristics ;  but  the  power  of  speech  on  the  part  of 
the  naJiasJi  does  not  seem  to  have  surprised  Eve 
at  the  time  of  her  temptation  nor  Adam  later. 
They  seem  to  have  been  familiar  with  the  posses- 
sion of  this  power  on  the  part  of  the  nahash.  It 
has  sometimes  been  said  that  certain  species  of 
serpents  have  rudimentary  feet;  but  no  one  will 
affirm  that  any  serpent  ever  had  the  gifts  of 
speech  possessed  by  the  naJiasJi.  Serpents  have 
no  organs  of  speech.  God  could,  of  course,  have 
given  this  power  to  a  serpent  in  Eden ;  but  there 
is  no  hint  that  any  special  bestowment  was  made 
in  this  case,  as  in  the  case  of  Balaam's  ass,  whether 
that  narrative  be  subjective  or  objective. 

The  question  arises  as  to  what  this  agent  was, 
and  who  was  the  principal  behind  the  agent.  Is 
this  narrative  history  or  allegory?  It  is  easier  to 
admit  the  historicity  of  the  narrative  than  to  ex- 
plain it  on  any  other  hypothesis ;  but  even  if  we 
admit  that  it  was  allegory,  its  profound  truths 
and  lessons  would  still  remain.  The  presence  of 
some  skilful  principal  back  of  the  active  agent  is 
apparent  at  every  stage.     That  principal  was  Sa- 


6o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEEICULTIES. 

tan,  as  many  passages  of  Scripture  clearly  teach. 
But  what  was  this  creature,  here  called  the  na- 
JiasJi  ?  Did  a  slimy,  loathsome  snake  tempt  our 
first  mother?  It  is  almost  impossible  so  to  be- 
lieve ;  and  the  Scriptures  do  not  so  affirm.  No 
mere  reptile — except  by  the  presence  of  continued 
miracle — could  do  the  things  attributed  to  this 
ncJiash.  It  is  far  more  natural  to  believe  that  we 
have  here  some  apostate  spirit,  erect  in  attitude, 
attractive  in  form,  resplendent  in  appearance, 
and  eloquent  in  speech.  The  sentence  later  pro- 
nounced on  this  creature  clearly  shows  that  with 
the  sentence  came  humiliation,  manifested  in  a 
degTading  form  of  motion  and  method  of  secur- 
ing food.  If  a  serpent  had  tempted  Eve ;  there 
would  be  no  significance  in  the  sentence  inflicted. 
Our  Lord  clearh'  teaches  us  in  John  viii.  44  that 
the  devil  was  a  murderer  and  the  father  of  lies 
from  the  beginning;  and  the  Apostle  Paul,  in 
writing  to  the  Corinthians,  compared  the  seduc- 
tion of  Eve  to  that  of  the  Corinthians;  but  the 
Corinthians  vrere  in  no  danger  of  being  deceived 
by  a  brute  animal,  hence  Eve  must  have  been  be- 
guiled by  something  more  than  a  reptile.  We  are 
distinctly-  told  that  Satan  can  be  transformed  into 
an  angel  of  light ;  and  there  seems  to  have  been 
no  other  time  when  such  a  transformation  was  so 
important  to  his  Satanic  purposes  as  in  the  Gar- 
den of  Eden.  One  can  scarcely  help  feeling  that 
he  was  so  transformed  there.  He  may  have  as- 
sumed the  form  of   some   glorious   and  winged 


THE   SIN  AXD    SENTEiVCE   IN  EDEN.         6i 

creature,  such  as  in  Scripture  was  known  as  a 
seraph ;  some  creature  with  angelic  attractions  in 
dress,  appearance,  and  eloquence.  It  is  certain 
that  the  sentence  pronounced  changed  the  shape 
and  properties  of  this  creature ;  it  was  then  that 
it  was  commanded  to  go  on  its  belly  and  eat 
dust.  Before  this  curse  was  pronounced  this  be- 
ing may  have  been  one  of  the  most  intelligent, 
gentle,  and  beautiful  of  creatures.  His  mode  of 
attack  was  w^onderfully  skilful.  He  took  advan- 
tage of  Eve  when  she  was  alone,  and  thus  with- 
out the  counsel  and  succor  of  her  husband.  He 
does  not  contradict  the  word  of  God ;  he  merely 
asks  questions.  He  insinuates  doubt ;  he  implies 
that  it  cannot  be  possible  that  God  would  lay 
upon  Eve  an  arbitrary  command.  At  the  outset 
the  woman  answers  well ;  but  it  would  have  been 
better  if  she  had  not  parleyed  with  the  arch- 
traitor,  Satan  denies  nothing,  affirms  nothing; 
but  he  questions  everything.  Finally  he  becomes 
bold  and  blasphemous.  He  suggests  that  God  is 
jealous  of  His  honors  and  fears  to  have  His  crea- 
tures become  wise  as  gods.  His  language  is  so 
artful  that  while  he  means  one  thing,  Eve  under- 
stands him  to  mean  another.  We  never  can  ex- 
plain how  the  first  thought  of  sin  can  arise  in  the 
minds  of  innocent  beings.  This  is  the  first  time 
that  a  lie  was  even  suggested  to  Eve.  The  origin 
of  evil  is  a  metaphysical  problem  which  the  Bible 
does  not  attempt  to  explain.  It  is  the  bottomless 
abyss  of  rationalistic  thinking  and  of  theological 


62  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

teaching.  It  baffles  speculative  philosophy  as 
truly  as  Scriptural  theology.  To  explain  sin  from 
our  point  of  view  is  to  excuse  sin.  The  Bible 
clearly  shows  that  God  is  not  the  author  of  sin, 
and  that  it  was  man's  volition  which  brought  his 
pristine  innocence  to  an  end.  The  finest  meta- 
physical analysis  of  the  progress  of  sin  is  given  us 
by  the  Apostle  James  i.  13-15;  here  we  have  the 
natural  history  of  sin,  and  no  human  reasoning 
has  ever  approached  the  skill  of  this  analysis. 

The  Transgression. 

Eve's  curiosity  was  excited.  She  had  listened 
with  interest;  she  had  gazed  with  longing.  De- 
sire brought  forth  sin,  and  sin  when  finished 
brought  forth  death.  The  sophistry  of  the  na- 
JiasJi  was  too  much  for  her  unsophisticated  na- 
ture. He  seemed  so  wise,  so  noble,  so  good;  and 
the  promised  result  was  so  entrancing !  The  frail 
mother  of  the  race  in  that  evil  hour  disobeyed 
God,  partook  of  the  fruit,  and  gave  it  to  her  hus- 
band ;  with  fatal  facility  her  husband  ate,  and,  as 
Milton  says,  "  brought  death  into  the  world,  and 
all  our  woes." 

We  know  not  what  the  fruit  was  of  which  they 
partook.  Many  Greek  traditions  make  it  the  fig; 
some  of  the  rabbis  suggest  that  it  was  the  vine  or 
the  olive ;  but  the  Latin  fathers  and  Milton  sug- 
gest that  it  was  the  apple.  He  sings  of  it  as  "  that 
crude  apple  which  perverted  Eve."  We  probably 
have  in  this  later  supposition  an  unconscious  testi- 


THE    SIN  AND    SENTENCE   IN  EDEN.         d^ 

mony  to  the  value  of  the  apple  as,  all  things  eon- 
sidered,  the  best  fruit  the  world  has  produced. 
Were  Adam  and  Eve  forced  to  eat?  Certainly 
not.  It  was  their  own  voluntary  act.  Satan 
could  tempt  them  to  sin,  but  he  could  not  sin  for 
them.  He  can  incite  men  to  sin,  but  he  cannot 
compel  men  to  sin.  They  lifted  the  floodgate  ad- 
mitting the  stream  of  evil  to  flow  into  the  world, 
and  they  did  it  of  their  own  deliberate  choice. 
God  is  not  the  author  of  sin.  But  why  did  God 
permit  such  a  result?  Could  God  have  prevented 
it?  Yes,  by  making  man  a  machine.  If  man  be 
man,  he  must  be  free ;  if  not  free,  he  is  not  man. 
Freedom  is  the  inalienable  attribute  of  manhood ; 
but  if  free,  he  may  use  his  freedom  for  evil  rather 
than  for  good.  That  is  the  solemn,  awful,  and  yet 
glorious  responsibility  of  manhood.  God  could 
not — it  is  said  reverently — have  prevented  man's 
sin  without  doing  violence  to  the  nature  of  man 
as  a  free  agent,  of  man  as  man.  God  gave  him 
every  persuasive  to  obedience,  and  every  dissua- 
sive from  disobedience.  Milton,  to  quote  him 
once  more,  expresses  a  true  thought  regarding 
man  in  his  actual  strength  and  inherent  freedom, 
"  Sufficient  to  have  stood,  but  free  to  fall. "  Had 
God  by  physical  force  interposed  to  prevent  this 
act  of  disobedience,  there  would  have  been  no 
virtue  in  obedience.  Involuntary  obedience  is 
no  obedience.  If  there  be  not  freedom,  there  is 
neither  virtue  nor  vice.  The  introduction  of  sin 
is  the  problem  of  the  ages.     We  can,  however, 


64  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

see  some  signal  benefits  arising  from  these  sad 
catastrophes.  If  the  first  Adam  had  not  sinned, 
the  second  Adam  had  not  redeemed;  where  sin 
abounded,  grace  superabounded.  The  loss  of 
the  terrestrial  Paradise  made  possible  a  celestial 
Paradise.  The  fall  gives  incomparable  glory  to 
the  manifestation  of  God's  wisdom,  mercy,  and 
love.  Redeemed  sinners  will  sing  songs  in 
Heaven,  to  which  unfallen  angels  -will  ever  be 
strangers.  Eternity  will  be  the  witness  of  God's 
refulgent  glory,  ineffable  love,  and  immaculate 
holiness  in  the  salvation  of  lost  man ! 

The  Sentence  Inflicted. 

The  eyes  of  Adam  and  Eve  were  opened.  The 
commission  of  sin  always  lets  in  a  terrible  light 
upon  the  soul.  Our  judgment  of  sin  changes  the 
moment  we  have  committed  sin.  Innocence  had 
previously  clothed  Adam  and  Eve  as  with  a  robe ; 
now  leafy  vestments  perform  that  office.  Con- 
scious guilt  made  them  cowards,  and  they  es- 
caped into  the  dark  recesses  of  the  garden,  as  if 
they  could  hide  from  the  all-seeing  God.  God  in 
the  cool  of  the  day  sought  them  out.  He  was 
already  the  good  Shepherd,  going  after  the  wan- 
dering sheep.  In  the  ethnic  religions  we  see  man 
toilfully  seeking  after  God ;  in  revealed  religion 
we  see  God  lovingly  seeking  man.  Sin  existed 
in  the  universe  before  it  blighted  the  blessedness 
of  Eden,  and  love  was  eternal  in  the  heart  of  God 
before    Adam   and   Eve  were    placed  in    Eden. 


THE   SliV  AND   SENTENCE   IN  EDEN.         65 

Adam's  lack  of  chivalry,  born  of  sin,  blames  the 
woman,  and  the  woman  blames  the  serpent,  and 
the  inference  is  that  the  naJiash  would  blame 
God;  but  Adam's  reply  was  too  witless  to  deserve 
God's  notice.  God  does  not  interrogate  the  na- 
JiasJi.  Out  of  pure  malignity  he  was  self-moved 
in  harmony  with  his  inherent  Satanism ;  on  him, 
therefore,  first  falls  the  terrible  words  of  doom. 
Doubtless  the  curse  fell  both  upon  the  principal 
and  the  agent.  It  is  now  that  the  naJiasJi  be- 
comes degraded  to  its  present  loathsome  appear- 
ance, though  formerly  it  may  have  been  beautiful 
and  may  have  moved  with  wings,  with  head  erect 
and  with  beauty  and  dignity  in  its  form.  Doubt- 
less, also,  the  curse  was  a  typical  prophecy  of  the 
great  victory  which  Christ  was  to  win  over  Satan 
and  all  his  works.  Enmity  was  now  put  between 
the  seed  of  the  naJiasJi  and  of  the  woman.  From 
this  time  forth  two  kinds  of  people  are  seen  strug- 
gling in  the  world.  Evermore  there  will  be  a 
Cain  and  an  Abel,  an  Ishmael  and  an  Isaac,  an 
Esau  and  a  Jacob;  the  one  will  be  after  the  flesh 
and  the  other  after  the  spirit.  This  enmity  un- 
derlies the  mighty  conflict  of  the  ages.  Under 
Christ  go  forth  the  hosts  of  truth  and  righteous- 
ness ;  under  Satan  the  forces  of  death  and  hell. 
The  battle  will  be  waged  until  Christ  becomes 
King  of  all  nations,  and  is  recognized  as  Lord 
blessed  for  evermore. 

Motherhood  was  henceforth  to    bring  sorrow. 
Motherhood    is    the   glory   of   womanhood.       In 
S 


66  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

motherhood  woman  loses  herself  in  another  life. 
In  giving"  another  life  to  the  world  motherhood 
becomes  like  Godhood.  If  motherhood  multiplies 
a  woman's  sorrows,  it  multiplies  also  her  power  to 
bestow  blessings.  Christianity  everywhere  puts 
the  crown  of  glory  upon  the  brow  of  woman  and 
mother.  In  bestowing  a  new  life  the  rapture  of  life 
is  wondrously  and  almost  divinely  experienced. 

The  very  ground  was  cursed  for  man's  sake, 
and  in  more  sweat  and  toil  than  otherwise  would 
have  been  necessary  was  man  to  eat  his  bread. 
Eve's  name  is  now  changed  from  Isha^  manness, 
to  Chavah,  life  or  living — as  the  mother  of  all  liv- 
ing. From  the  skins  of  animals,  probably  slain 
for  sacrifices,  they  made  clothing  for  themselves. 
They  are  now  sent  from  the  garden;  and  God, 
probably  in  holy  sarcasm,  rebukes  Adam's  at- 
tempt to  become  like  God.  He  listened  to  the 
voice  of  the  tempter,  and  instead  of  becoming 
like  God,  he  has  become  an  outcast.  Behold  the 
cherubim  and  the  flaming  sword  at  the  gate  of 
Eden!  All  connected  with  the  cherubim  is  very 
obscure.  This  seems  to  be  the  first  occasion  of 
the  introduction  of  this  mystic  symbol,  which 
later  was  to  represent  some  of  the  profoundest 
mysteries  of  redemption.  In  this  symbol  was  a 
glorious  element  of  hope.  Promises  of  Paradise 
restored  marked  the  sorrowful  departure  of  our 
first  parents  from  Paradise  lost.  The  gleaming 
sword  from  the  midst  of  the  cherubim  pointed  to 
the  cross  of  Calvary. 


THE    SIN  AND    SENTENCE   IN  EDEN.         67 

Ethnic  Traditions. 

Many  nations  have  legends  of  the  fall.  The 
Chaldean  mythologists  make  a  thirst  of  knowl- 
edge the  cause  of  man's  fall.  In  the  Persian  leg- 
ends we  have  a  happy  pair,  MescJiiaJi  and  Mcs- 
cJuane^  who  were  holy  in  deed  and  word,  and  who 
dwelt  in  a  garden.  In  the  Hindu  mythology  there 
is  a  king  of  dragons  named  Naga  ;  probably  this 
is  a  form  of  the  Hebrew  naJiash.  The  first  being 
created  by  Brahma,  Krishna,  triumphs  over  Kali- 
naga  by  trampling  on  his  head.-  Doubtless  all 
the  nations  absorbed  something  of  the  truth  fully 
revealed  in  the  Bible.  The  Bible  story  teaches 
the  utter  malignity  of  Satan.  Every  man  has  his 
own  Eden.  Every  man  is  in  some  sense  his  own 
Adam.  Every  man  must  watch  and  pray  that  he 
be  not  led  into  temptation.  God's  mercy  runs  as 
a  golden  thread  through  the  whole  story  of  reve- 
lation. Preparation  of  the  incarnation  of  Christ 
is  seen  at  Eden's  gate.  It  is  the  splendor  of 
prophecy,  the  charm  of  history,  and  the  glory  of 
psalmody ;  and  it  reaches  through  the  Bible  and 
through  the  history  of  the  race  from  Eden  lost  to 
Eden  found. 


WHAT  WAS  CAIN'S  MARK,  AND  WHO  WAS 
HIS  WIFE  ? 


V. 

WHAT    WAS    CAIN'S    MARK,    AND    WHO 
WAS    HIS    WIFE? 

The  fullest  account  of  Cain's  life  is  found  in  the 
fourth  chapter  of  Genesis.  There  was  doubtless 
much  significance  in  the  name  by  which  Eve 
called  her  first-born  son.  What  is  the  meaning  of 
his  name?  To  this  question  many  answers  have 
been  given.  Some  writers  connect  it  with  the 
Arabic  kayn^  meaning  a  smith,  or  kayin^  a  lance, 
because  of  the  arts  which  the  Cainites  introduced. 
Others  derive  it  from  a  word  meaning  envy ;  others 
from  a  word  signifying  to  beat,  with  a  possible 
allusion  to  the  murder  of  Abel.  Still  others  from 
a  word  meaning  to  lament.  But  the  best  author- 
ities derive  it  from  the  word  kanaJi,  to  create,  to 
acquire,  to  obtain,  making  the  name  mean  "  posses- 
sion," or  "acquisition."  This  seems  to  be  the 
meaning  of  Eve's  words  when  she  said:  "  I  have 
gotten  a  man  from  the  Lord. "  He  was,  according 
to  the  record,  the  first-born  of  the  human  race,  and 
also  the  first  murderer  and  fratricide.  What  did 
Eve  mean  by  her  statement  regarding  his  birth? 
Did  she  imagine  that  the  son  now  born  was  no 
other  than  the  divine  personage  promised  in  the 
gracious  assurance  recorded  in  the  fifteenth  verse 


72  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

of  the  preceding  chapter?  Did  she  really  say,  "  I 
have  gotten  a  man  (even)  Jehovah"?  No  one  will 
doubt  that  her  words  can  fairly  be  so  interpreted. 
She  may  have  really  believed  that  the  seed  prom- 
ised which  should  bruise  the  serpent's  head  had 
now  come.  Others  make  her  words  to  mean,  "  I 
have  gotten  a  man  with  the  help  of  Jehovah." 
Those  who  so  interpret  her  words  are  not  governed 
so  much  by  the  language  of  the  text  as  by  the  opin- 
ion that  she  could  not  so  soon  have  developed  the 
Messianic  idea,  that  this  belief  would  credit  her 
with  too  mature  a  christological  conception.  But 
we  know  that  Enoch,  in  the  seventh  generation, 
recognized  Jehovah  as  the  coming  one ;  and  Eve 
might  have  done  so  thus  early.  It  is  certain  that 
the  mind  of  Eve  was  much  occupied  with  the  idea 
of  the  coming  deliverer.  It  was  natural  for  a 
young  mother,  especially  in  the  wonderful  cir- 
cumstances of  this  birth,  to  cherish  high  hopes  of 
her  first-born  son.  In  any  case,  her  words  indi- 
cate a  beautiful  faith.  In  the  birth  of  Cain,  her 
faith  laid  hold  of  the  word  "Jehovah,"  as  seen  in 
the  fact  that  she  used  the  divine  name  Jehovah, 
and  not  the  vaguer  Elohim,  the  name  she  used 
when  holding  the  colloquy  with  the  wicked  na- 
hash.  Some  have  supposed  that  previous  to  this 
she  had  borne  daughters,  and  that  the  birth  of  a 
son  was  thus  emphasized;  but  the  natural  impres- 
sion in  reading  the  narrative  is  that  Cain  was  the 
first-born  of  the  human  race.  What  delight  must 
have  been  experienced  when  this  child  was  born ! 


CA/.V'S  MARA',    AND   I/IS    WIFE.  73 

Every  mother  ean  recall  the  marvels  of  this  won- 
drous experience.  But  imagine  the  feelinij;-s  of 
the  first  mother — at  least  so  far  as  this  record  in- 
forms us — at  the  birth  of  the  first-born  man  child. 
No  imagination,  however  vivid,  can  fully  conceive 
the  reality  of  this  impressive  case.  Well  might 
Eve  think  that  this  child  was  no  other  than  the 
promised  deliverer.  This  child  was  at  least,  we 
are  safe  in  saying,  the  pledge  of  the  deliverer  at 
some  time,  even  if  he  were  not  himself  that  de- 
liverer. In  this  particular  case  the  young  mother 
was  greatly  mistaken  in  her  estimate  of  Cain's 
worth.  It  would  seem  as  if  the  tempter  in  the 
garden  had  more  to  do  with  him  than  Jehovah. 

Offerings  by  Cain  and  Abel. 

To  Adam  and  Eve  another  son  was  born.  Him 
they  called,  perhaps  by  divine  direction  in  allu- 
sion to  his  untimely  end,  Abel,  meaning  vanity, 
a  term  which  the  psalmist  applies  to  the  race  as  a 
whole.  Eve  seems  more  sober  now  in  naming 
this  child  than  when  she  named  Cain.  Life's  ex- 
periences are  more  numerous  and  serious.  The 
historian  seven  times,  with  a  pathetic  iteration, 
mentions  the  fact  that  Abel  was  Cain's  brother. 
If  the  name  were  divinely  given,  then  it  was  an 
unconscious  and  melancholy  prophecy  of  Abel's 
early  death.  Abel  was  a  keeper  of  sheep ;  Cain 
was  a  tiller  of  the  ground.  The  parents  brought 
up  their  sons  to  habits  of  industry.  The  duty  of 
religious  worship  had  also  been  taught  the  two 


74  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEEICULTIES. 

sons.  There  was  already  a  special  time  and  place 
for  worship.  Already  the  Sabbath  seems  to  have 
been  observed,  as  indicated  by  the  phrase,  "  in 
process  of  time,"  or  more  literally,  "at  the  end  of 
days."  To  the  place  where  the  visible  glory  of 
God  was  displayed,  or  the  Shekinah,  the  sons 
brought  their  offerings.  Cain  brought  of  the 
fruit  of  the  ground,  and  Abel  of  the  firstlings  of 
his  flock.  Thus  in  the  dawn  of  human  life  we  see 
the  offering  of  sacrifices  to  God.  God  must  have 
given  some  instruction  regarding  these  offerings. 
Here  at  the  very  threshold  of  history  we  come  on 
the  mystery  of  the  institution  of  sacrifices.  This 
fact  suggests  profound  questions  in  life  and  its  re- 
lations to  God.  For  Abel  and  his  offering  God 
had  respect ;  but  not  unto  Cain  and  his  offering. 
There  was  a  difference  between  the  offerings,  and 
also  between  the  offerers.  Cain's  offering  was  an 
acknowledgment  of  God  as  a  benefactor,  he  bring- 
ing a  minchah^  or  thank-offering.  But  in  his  offer- 
ing there  was  no  confession  of  sin,  no  plea  for  par- 
don, no  suggestion  of  atonement.  His  offering 
was  such  as  any  self-righteous  man  could  make. 
Abel  seems  to  have  brought  a  thank-offering  and 
also  a  victim  to  be  slain  for  his  sins.  Here  is  a 
suggestion  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  who  was  a 
lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world. 

There  was  also  a  difference  in  the  spirit  of  the 
offerers.  In  Hebrews  xi.  4  we  read  that  "  by  faith 
Abel  offered  unto  God  a  more  excellent  sacrifice 
than    Cain."     This   is   suggestive   language.      It 


CAIN'S  MARK,    AND   HIS    WIFE.  75 

teaches  that  Abel's  offering  had  much  more  in  it 
than  Cain's;  it  was  fuller — plciona — than  Cain's. 
Wickliffe's  translation  is,  a  "much  more  sacri- 
fice." It  possessed  a  principle  which  Cain's 
lacked;  for  Abel  already  by  faith  grasped  the 
hope  of  the  coming  Messiah.  The  brothers  were 
here  and  thus  divided.  They  were  types  of  the 
two  great  classes  found  in  all  ages;  one  serves 
God  only  from  the  head,  giving  Him  distant  hom- 
age as  Creator ;  but  the  other  draws  near  to  God, 
acknowledging  the  offerer's  personal  sinfulness 
and  God's  divine  and  immaculate  holiness.  Al- 
ready we  have  a  suggestion  of  the  truth  that 
without  the  shedding  of  blood  there  is  no  remis- 
sion of  sin. 

Cain's  Awful  Crime. 

God's  rejection  of  Cain's  offering  made  him 
very  wroth.  He  showed  fierce  anger  against  his 
brother.  His  state  of  mind  was  thoroughly  Sa- 
tanic; but  God  was  patient  with  him,  notwith- 
standing his  contumacy.  God  expostulated  with 
him  as  to  how  he  also  might  receive  a  blessing. 
For  him  also  there  might  be  a  lifting  up  of  the 
countenance  of  God.  But  if  repentance  was  not 
exercised,  sin,  like  a  wild  beast  in  ambush,  would 
crouch  at  tlie  door  ready  to  spring  upon  the  sinner. 
Sin  did  so  crouch  and  so  spring,  and  it  finally  made 
Cain  its  prey.  It  has  been  said  that  the  first  mur- 
der was  caused  by  a  religious  dispute ;  and  it  is  cer- 
tain that  many  times  since  disputes  about  religion 


76  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

are  responsible  for  acts  of  irreligion.  Cain  con- 
cealed his  true  sentiments  toward  Abel  and  con- 
versed freely  with  him  until  he  could  carry  out 
his  murderous  design.  So  acted  Joab  toward  Ab- 
ner  and  Amasa ;  so  acted  Absalom  toward  Amnon. 
Cain  was  naturally  a  morose  and  vengeful  man ; 
and  so  he  rose  up  and  slew  his  brother.  We  are 
fully  informed  as  to  why  he  committed  this  Sa- 
tanic deed  (i  John  iii.  12),  "  because  his  own  works 
were  evil,  and  his  brother's  righteous."  No 
crime  in  the  world's  history  impresses  the  mind 
with  horror  more  than  the  crime  of  Cain ;  and 
treachery  adds  blackness  to  the  fratricide.  Per- 
haps he  did  not  fully  know  how  small  a  matter 
might  cause  death,  as,  according  to  the  record, 
this  was  the  first  instance  of  human  mortality. 
But  it  is  certain  that  the  spirit  of  murder  was  in 
his  heart.  Solemn  to  us  are  the  words  of  our 
Lord  at  this  point,  teaching  us  that  the  spirit  of 
hate,  ardently  cherished,  makes  any  man  a  mur- 
derer in  God's  sight.  Thus  by  the  act  of  Cain 
death  came  into  the  world,  and  the  first  man  who 
became  its  victim  died  a  martyr  for  truth  and 
God.  How  the  hearts  of  Adam  and  Eve  must 
have  bled!  Their  first-born  son  is  a  murderer, 
and  their  next  born  is  the  victim !  We  may  be 
sure  that  over  the  living  sinner  they  grieved  more 
than  over  the  dead  saint.  Abel  was  the  first  from 
earth  to  enter  Heaven,  and  he  entered  it  as  the 
first  of  the  noble  army  of  martyrs.  It  was  mar- 
vellous mercy  on  the  part  of  God  that  He  should 


CAIN'S  MARK,    AND   II IS    WIFE.  77 

enter  into  a  colloquy  with  Cain,  who  now  added 
lying  to  murder.  It  would  be  difficult  to  use 
words  which  were  more  insolent,  contemptuous, 
and  mendacious  than  those  of  Cain  who  said  to 
God,  when  He  asked  concerning  Abel,  "  I  know 
not;  am  I  my  brother's  keeper?"  His  heart  was 
already  hardened  toward  his  brother,  as  it  was 
impious  toward  God.  Terrible  is  God's  curse 
upon  Cain !  Abel's  voice  was  silent,  but  his  blood 
was  shed,  and  that  blood  with  trumpet  tongue 
shall  cry  from  the  ground  until  its  voice  shall 
reach  the  throne  of  the  Almight}^,  calling  down 
vengeance  on  the  guilty.  To  Cain  the  very 
ground  is  cursed,  so  that  it  could  not  yield  ade- 
quate results  for  the  most  careful  tillage.  A 
fugitive  and  a  vagabond  shall  he  be.  Well 
might  he  exclaim,  "  My  punishment  is  greater 
than  I  can  bear."  If  w^e  can  take  as  accurate  the 
other  rendering,  "  My  iniquity  is  greater  than 
forgiveness,"  we  may  cherish  the  hope  of  his  re- 
pentance. He  is  driven  from  the  place  where  the 
visible  symbols  of  God's  presence  were  manifested, 
and  no  more  shall  he  see  the  divine  glory  shining 
forth  between  the  cherubim.  From  the  society 
of  his  parents  he  is  driven  forth  as  a  vagabond 
on  the  earth,  which  is  cursed  to  a  double  barren- 
ness wherever  he  shall  set  his  foot.  Remorse 
shall  gnaw  his  soul.  Every  stranger  he  fancies 
will  seek  to  slay  him.  Thus  the  guilty  wretch 
almost  excites  the  pity  of  angels,  and  he  has  alto- 
gether won  the  fellowship  of  devils. 


78  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

His  Mark. 

We  do  not  know  where  the  "  land  of  Nod"  was. 
The  name  means  simply  flight,  or  exile,  or  va- 
grancy. Some  have  fancifully  supposed  that  they 
foimd  a  connection  between  the  original  word 
and  India;  others  have  seen  a  relation  between 
the  words  Cain  and  China;  but  all  that  we  know 
of  its  position  is  that  it  was  "east  of  Eden."  It 
is  utterly  vain  to  attempt  the  identification  of 
Nod  with  any  definite  localit}'.  There  he  built  a 
city,  or  fort,  or  kremlin,  and  named  it  after  his 
son  Enoch,  as  his  own  name  would  dishonor  the 
place,  he  built  the  fort,  or  keep,  for  self-protec- 
tion under  the  instinct  of  fear.  Perhaps  in  his 
effort  to  build  a  city  he  disobeyed  God ;  and  pos- 
sibly, also,  in  that  effort  we  see  how  vigorously 
he  strove  to  overcome  the  disadvantages  under 
which  he  suffered  as  a  tiller  of  the  ground,  which 
now,  as  a  part  of  his  curse,  had  become  virtually 
barren  under  his  hand.  As  a  vagrant,  perhaps 
hating  and  hated,  he  lived,  with  awful  memories 
of  sin,  and  thus  with  terrible  experiences  of  re- 
morse. 

This  leads  us  to  ask.  What  was  the  mark  which, 
in  our  common  version,  it  is  said  that  the  Lord 
put  upon  Cain?  This  question  has  given  rise  to 
many  foolish  conjectures.  Four  out  of  every  five 
persons  whom  we  meet  believe  that  some  brand, 
mark,  or  stigma  was  placed  on  the  brow  of  Cain. 
Nothing  is  further  from  the  truth.     The  Scrip- 


CAIN'S  MARK,    AND   HIS    IVIFE.  79 

ture,  properly  translated,  makes  no  suggestion  of 
such  a  brand,  and  yet  this  thought  has  gone  into 
literature,  into  speeches  in  our  courts,  and  into 
much  of  our  common  phraseology.  It  is  a  thou- 
sand pities  that  the  Bible  is  so  often  mistrans- 
lated, misinterpreted,  and  misapplied.  He  is  do- 
ing a  genuine  service  for  God's  Word  and  for  the 
young  people  of  our  churches  who  clearly  and 
wisely  separates  between  God's  revelation  and 
man's  misinterpretation.  From  the  Septuagint 
version  in  which  we  have  the  words,  "  groaning 
and  trembling  shalt  thou  be,"  some  have  supposed 
that  he  became  a  pitiable  paralytic.  One  old 
writer,  author  of  "  Bereshith  Rabba,"  says  the 
mark  was  a  circle  of  the  sun  rising  on  him; 
another  that  it  was  Abel's  dog  which  constantly 
followed  him.  Some  interpreters  of  the  Talmud 
say  that  it  was  the  letter  fan  on  his  forehead,  as  the 
first  letter  of  the  Hebrew  word  tesJnibch^  meaning 
repentance;  and  one  learned  rabbi,  to  surpass 
all  other  ridiculous  interpretations,  affirmed  that 
Cain's  mark  was  a  long  horn  growing  out  of  his 
forehead.  This  is  all  pure  tradition,  superstition, 
and  nonsense.  The  wetched  fratricide  was  filled 
with  alarm  lest  all  he  met  should  slay  him,  and 
God,  as  an  act  of  special  grace,  declared  that 
sevenfold  vengeance  should  be  taken  on  the 
slayer  of  Cain.  To  comfort  the  wretched  outcast, 
as  the  Revised  Version  has  it,  "  the  Lord  ap- 
pointed a  sign  for  Cain."  This  is  an  excellent 
translation  of  the  original  phrase.      He  did  not 


8o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

put  a  mark  upon  Cain ;  that  would  have  been  the 
most  likely  way  to  have  brought  upon  him  the 
dangers  which  he  feared.  The  Lord  simply  gave 
him  a  sign,  or  token,  as  a  memorial  that  he  should 
not  be  slain.  The  word  translated  "  mark"  is  oth. 
In  like  manner  God  gave  a  sign,  or  token,  to 
Noah,  Genesis  ix.  13;  to  Moses,  Exodus  iii.  12; 
offered  one  to  Ahaz,  Isaiah  vii.  11,  and  to  Heze- 
kiah,  Isaiah  xxxviii.  7,  8.  Probably  this  sign  was 
visible  to  Cain  only,  and  was  not  in  any  way  per- 
ceptible to  others.  Just  what  the  sign  was  we 
may  never  be  able  to  determine,  but  nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  it  was  not  a  brand  upon 
himself.  One  is  almost  impatient  that  such  mis- 
conceptions of  Scripture  should  be  found  in  the 
thought  and  literature  of  our  time,  as  w^ell  as 
through  the  past  centuries.  A  mistranslation 
often  perpetuates  itself  in  the  daily  speech  even 
of  those  who  know  the  true  meaning  of  the  pas- 
sages which  they  continue  to  misrepresent. 

Cain's  Wife. 

Who  was  Cain's  wife?  This  question  is  one  of 
the  standing  conundrums  on  the  part  of  certain 
irreverent  or  religiously  indifferent  men  and  wo- 
men. It  has  also  perplexed  some  of  the  most 
thoughtful  and  devout  believers  in  divine  revela- 
tion. It  is  astonishing  that  so  many  men  are 
ready  to  neglect  known  duty  in  their  desire  to 
find  objections  to  the  inspired  narrative.  When 
urged  to  follow  Christ  they  immediately  ask  un- 


CAIN'S  MARK,   AND   IF  IS    WIFE,  8i 

answerable  questions  regarding-  the  Bible.  It  is 
well  to  remind  such  cavillers  that  it  will  be  quite 
time  enough  for  them  to  demand  solutions  of  per- 
plexing problems  when  they  have  obeyed  God  in 
all  known  duties.  So  long  as  they  are  disobe- 
dient to  what  they  thoroughly  know,  they  have 
no  right  to  expect  light  on  problems  which  they 
may  never  be  able  exhaustively  to  understand. 
Some  one  has  quaintily  said  that  these  critics  are 
determined  to  choke  themselves  with  bones,  while 
they  reject  the  supply  of  boneless  fish  which  is  suf- 
ficient for  all  their  wants. 

Every  earnest  student  of  the  Bible,  however, 
may  properly  study  and,  if  possible,  discover  all 
the  truth  which  it  contains.  Doubtless,  as  John 
Robinson  in  circumstances  of  the  greatest  interest 
said  in  substance,  God  has  more  light  yet  to  break 
forth  from  His  word.  We  do  well  to  study  it 
carefully,  and  to  master  all  the  discoverable  truth 
which  it  contains.  Was  Cain's  wife  his  sister? 
So  it  has  been  frequently  and  emphatically  af- 
firmed. 

If  there  were  not  various  centres  of  Creation, 

and  so  a  possible  pre- Adamite  race,  there  must 

have  been  a  marriage  between  some  brother  and 

sister  in  the  Adamite  family.      It  is  barely  possible, 

however,  that  this  incestuous  marriage,  as  we  now 

judge,  was  not  between  Cain  and  his  sister.     Adam 

must  already  have  had  daughters  of  whose  birth 

we  have  no  information.     There  was  now  a  very 

considerable  population.     We  know  that  at  the 
6 


82  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

birth  of  Seth,  Adam  was  one  hundred  and  thirty 
years  old,  and  in  all  probability  there  were  many 
sons  and  daughters  besides  those  specifically 
named.  There  certainly  was  a  population  whom 
Cain  feared,  lest  he  might  be  put  to  death.  We 
can  hardly  suppose  that  he  was  afraid  of  his  father 
and  mother.  It  is  not  at  all  improbable  that  there 
was  a  very  considerable  population  before  Cain's 
marriage,  and  his  wife  may  have  been  from  one 
of  these  families.  It  is  not  impossible,  how^ever, 
that  she  was  literally  his  sister.  We  may  well 
believe  that  if  she  stood  in  this  relationship  she 
was  married  to  Cain  before  the  death  of  Abel,  for 
we  can  hardly  believe  that  after  that  event  she 
would  have  been  willing  to  become  Cain's  wife. 
The  marriage  of  brothers  and  sisters  may  have 
been  considered  at  that  time  a  necessary  condition 
to  the  propagation  of  the  race.  We  may  well  be- 
lieve also  that  in  that  early  day  the  contrasts 
between  members  of  the  primitive  family,  as 
between  Cain  and  Abel,  were  strongly  marked 
Thus  the  conditions  of  marriage  would  be  more 
normal  than  between  members  of  the  same  family 
in  our  day.  We  know  also  that  the  laws  prohibit- 
ing the  union  of  brothers  and  sisters,  which  after- 
ward were  enacted,  were  then  unknown.  It  is  a 
remarkable  fact  also  that  in  very  much  later  times 
and  among  what  were  then  the  most  civilized  na- 
tions, such  alliances  were  not  forbidden,  and  were 
not  considered  incestuous.  We  know  that  not  only 
did  the  Athenian  law  not  forbid  such  marriages, 


CAIN'S  MARK,    AND   JUS    WIFE.  83 

but  it  made  it  compulsory  for  a  brother  to  marry  a 
sister,  if  after  reaching  a  certain  age  she  had  not 
found  a  husband.  We  know  also  that  Abraham 
married  Sarah,  who  was  his  half-sister,  and  Moses 
was  himself  the  offspring  of  a  marriage  which  the 
laws  he  promulgated  would  have  prohibited  as  un- 
holy. The  question  as  to  Cain's  wife  is  not  really 
one  of  much  importance.  The  frequency  and  per- 
sistency with  which  it  is  asked  is  no  evidence  of 
its  real  importance,  but  rather  of  the  inquisitive, 
if  not  perverse,  spirit  of  the  questioners.  It  is 
fitting,  however, .  that  all  the  light  which  the 
Scripture  enables  us  to  possess  should  be  thrown 
upon  the  subject.  When  objectors  to  divine  reve- 
lation ask  this  question,  supposing  that  it  is  in 
some  sense  an  excuse  for  their  neglect  of  duty, 
they  deserve  very  little  consideration  at  our  hands. 
When  they  will  in  the  spirit  of  reverence  obey  all 
the  commands  which  they  fully  know,  it  will  be 
quite  time  enough  for  us  to  give  them  solutions  of 
the  perplexing  problems  of  Scripture.  Were  God 
to  give  them  full  light  on  tmknown  duties,  so  long 
as  they  refuse  to  walk  in  the  light  they  now  have, 
God  would  then  be  putting  a  premium  on  their 
disobedience  and  perversity.  Those  who  do 
God's  will  fully  know  that  will.  This  is  a  law 
illustrated  in  the  study  of  every  science  and  art, 
as  truly  as  in  the  experience  and  practice  of  true 
religion.  Only  as  we  walk  in  the  light  which  we 
have,  in  the  study  of  any  physical  phenomenon, 
can   we    expect   to    have    additional  light   falling 


84  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Upon  unseen  paths.  AVe  must  walk  up  to  the 
limit  of  the  known,  before  we  can  step  over  into 
the  realm  of  the  tmknown,  in  all  the  broad  spheres 
of  scientific  thought,  as  truly  as  in  the  great  realms 
of  divine  revelation.  There  is  so  much  worthful 
knowledge  which  we  can  acquire  that  it  is  use- 
less to  spend  time  in  the  effort  to  acquire  knowl- 
edge which  never  can  be  certain,  and  which  if 
certain  is  practically  worthless.  It  is  well  some- 
times frankly  to  say,  "we  do  not  know."  Often 
the  profoundest  ignorance  is  the  serenest  knowl- 
edge. Time  and  energy  are  too  valuable  to  be 
wasted  in  useless  pursuits;  and  further  inquiry 
concerning  Cain's  wife  belongs  to  this  class  of 
useless  efforts. 

His  Fate. 

His  character  seems  to  have  been  morose  and 
malicious  to  a  remarkable  degree.  His  de- 
scendants are  enumerated  to  the  sixth  generation. 
They  became  numerous  and  powerful.  Lamech 
instituted  polygamy.  Jabal  adopted  a  nomadic 
life.  Jubal  invented  musical  instruments,  and 
Tubal-Cain  was  the  first  of  the  great  family  of 
smiths.  The  civilization  of  this  line  was  marked 
by  violence  and  godlessness  and  by  song  and  love. 
The  names  of  the  women  bespeak  their  beauty 
and  attractiveness.  Theirs  was  an  unsanctified 
civilization,  while  that  of  Seth  was  marked  by 
great  simplicity  and  godly  sincerity.  Cain  may 
have  obtained  divine  forgiveness.      His  penitence 


CAIN'S  MARK,    AND   HIS    WIFE.  85 

may  have  been  long  and  sincere.  If  the  transUi- 
tion  of  Genesis  iv.  13  may  be,  "mine  iniquity  is 
greater  than  that  it  may  be  forgiven,"  there  is 
some  hope  of  his  sincere  repentance  and  final  sal- 
vation. We  know  that  our  Lord  in  dying  prayed 
for  His  murderers,  and  we  know  that  Stephen 
followed  the  example  of  his  Lord  in  this  regard, 
and  possibly  so  did  Abel.  We  know  that  we  are 
all  in  danger  of  being  murderers  in  heart,  for 
hatred  of  our  brother,  according  to  Christ's 
higher  law,  is  murder. 

Thank  God !  that  for  us  and  for  Cain  there  is 
power  enough  in  the  cleansing  blood  of  Christ  to 
give  us  the  whiteness  of  snow!  The  words  of 
God,  in  Isaiah  i.  18,  fall  like  a  benediction  upon 
our  hearts,  conscious  of  their  many  and  heinous 
sins :  *'  Come  now,  and  let  us  reason  together, 
saith  the  Lord;  though  your  sins  be  as  scarlet, 
they  shall  be  white  as  snow ;  though  they  be  red 
like  crimson,  they  shall  be  as  wool." 


VI. 


WHO  WERE   THE    SONS    OF  GOD  AND  THE 
DAUGHTERS  OF  MEN? 


VI. 

WHO   WERE   THE    SONS   OF   GOD   AND 
THE    DAUGHTERS   OF    MEN? 

In  Genesis,  the  sixth  chapter  and  the  first  and 
second  verses,  our  attention  is  called  to  these  two 
classes,  and  to  their  relations  with  each  other.  It 
is  quite  certain  that  the  patriarchal  age  was  not 
one  of  general  innocence.  So  soon  as  daughters 
were  born,  the  beauty  of  womanhood  tempted  de- 
praved men,  and  the  holiness  of  married  love 
soon  gave  place  to  unhallowed  desire.  Thus  the 
primeval  sanctities  of  domestic  life  early  degener- 
ated into  sinful  unions  between  those  who  were 
called  "sons  of  God,"  and  those  who  are  de- 
scribed as  daughters  of  men. 

Distinct  Classes. 

Soon  after  the  sin  of  Cain  mankind  was  divided 
into  two  distinct  classes;  the  one  class  was  repre- 
sented by  Cain,  who  went  out  from  the  presence 
of  God,  and  the  other  class  was  represented  by 
Seth,  who  still  abode  where  God's  glory  was  spe- 
cially manifested.  The  Sethites  were  of  the  seed 
of  the  woman;  the  Cainites  were  of  the  seed  of 
the  serpent.  We  see  that  in  his  exile  Cain  built 
a  city,  a  fort,  or  a  keep,  the  fear  of  harm  and  the 
instinct  of  self-defence  being  strong  in  his  mind. 


90  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

When  the  Cainitcs  were  released  from  the  fear 
which  marred  all  the  happiness  of  their  progeni- 
tor, they  became  numerous  and  prosperous. 
Therefore  we  now  first  learn  of  the  building  of 
tents,  and  thus  we  see  that  the  people  must  have 
had  some  skill  in  carpentry;  they  also  showed 
that  they  had  acquired  some  knowledge  of  spin- 
ning, weaving,  and  working  in  iron  and  brass  for 
agricultural  implements  and  martial  weapons. 
They  also  manifested  considerable  skill  in  what 
may  be  called  the  fine  arts.  Lamech's  fragment 
of  song  exhibits  the  poetical  knowledge  which 
the  people  thus  early  possessed;  for  that  song, 
according  to  authoritative  critics,  possesses  the 
characteristics  of  perfect  Hebrew  poetry. 

The  birth  of  Seth  Eve  distinctly  recognized  as 
a  compensation  for  the  death  of  Abel.  In  a  spe- 
cial sense  she  received  him  as  a  gift  from  God; 
and  she  expected  that  his  descendants  would  be 
worthy  to  be  called  the  "sons  of  God."  We 
shall  later  see  that  her  hope  was  realized,  for  the 
descendants  of  Seth  were  ruled  by  the  spirit  of 
God,  and  so  were  truly  the  sons  of  God.  With 
the  birth  of  Enos  we  are  told  that  men  began  to 
call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.  The  interpreta- 
tion of  this  statement  is  not  free  from  difficulties. 
Some  suppose  that  this  language  means  that  men 
and  women  began  profanely  to  use  the  name  of 
God.  It  is  barely  possible  that  the  words  are 
capable  of  such  a  meaning ;  but  it  is  more  natural 
to  see  in  them  a  solemn  invocation  of  God  in  audi- 


SONS  OF  GOD  AND  DAUGHTERS  OF  MEN.      91 

ble  and  social  prayer.  This  method  of  approach- 
ing God  took  place,  as  we  have  seen,  at  the  birth  of 
Enos,  two  hundred  and  thirty-five  years  after  the 
creation  of  Adam.  Some  have  supposed  that  the 
words  mean  that  God's  name  was  now  called  upon 
or  applied  to  certain  men.  That  sense  of  the  ex- 
pression is  not  really  opposed  to  the  idea  that  men 
now  began  to  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.  It 
seems  wellnigh  certain  that  we  are  here  taught 
that  a  new  method  of  approaching  God  was  intro- 
duced. It  is  an  interesting  fact  that  up  to  this 
time  we  never  read  that  man  spoke  to  God,  al- 
though we  often  read  that  God  spoke  to  man.  It 
is  difficult  correctly  to  appreciate  the  primeval 
simplicity  of  the  thoughts  then  entertained  re- 
garding God.  Perhaps  a  sense  of  guilt,  after  the 
disobedience  of  Eden,  prevented  Adam  and  Eve 
from  addressing  God;  and  perhaps  a  profound 
reverence  might  produce  the  same  result.  The 
lines  of  human  life  are  now  diverging;  faith  is 
growing  on  the  one  side,  and  iniquity  is  increas- 
ing on  the  other.  The  race  is  passing  beyond  its 
infancy.  We  are  not  to  suppose  that  all  of  the 
line  of  Seth  were  righteous,  and  all  of  the  line 
of  Cain  iniquitous;  but  believing  penitents  were 
chiefly  in  the  line  of  Seth,  and  proud  defiers 
chiefly  in  the  line  of  Cain.  The  progress  of  evil 
showed  itself  in  fratricide,  in  polygamy,  and  in 
many  forms  of  violence. 


92  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Statistical  and  Genealogical. 

Dr.  Murphy  calls  the  first  four  chapters  of  Gene- 
sis the  primeval  Bible  of  mankind.  With  the  be- 
ginning of  the  fifth  chapter  we  enter  upon  a  docu- 
ment containing  a  genealogy  which  is  far-reaching 
in  its  relations.  The  fifth  chapter  contains  the  his- 
tory of  the  line  from  Adam  to  Noah,  the  genealogy 
ending  with  the  flood. 

Dr.  Joseph  Parker  entitles  his  paragraph  on  the 
fifth  chapter,  "  Nobodyism. "  There  are,  however, 
names  in  this  chapter  which  shine  like  diamonds 
amid  common  stones  and  semi-precious  jewels. 
Noah  was  the  second  head  of  the  line  of  faith  and 
hope,  of  which  Adam  was  the  first  head.  Enoch 
"walked  with  God."  This  is  a  remarkably 
suggestive  statement  in  the  midst  of  the  com- 
paratively dry  list  of  names  in  this  chapter. 
Enoch's  life  was  far  in  advance  of  the  highest 
attainments  of  his  ancestor  Seth.  Singularly 
enough  we  have  in  this  connection  the  word  God 
for  the  first  time  with  the  definite  article — God 
with  whom  Enoch  walked ;  but  this  sacred  name 
often  appears  afterward  with  the  definite  article. 
He  is  thus  clearly  distinguished  from  all  the  false 
gods  of  all  times  and  peoples.  In  Abel's  offering 
we  had  a  suggestion  of  an  atonement;  in  Seth's 
time  we  had  the  devout  heart  voicing  itself  in 
prayer;  and  now,  in  Enoch's  life,  we  have  a 
man  walking  with  God ;  and  for  three  hundred 
years  at  least  he  so  walked,  and  during  this  period 


SONS   OF  GOD   AND  DAUGHTERS   OF  MEN.     93 

he  was  not  withdrawn  from  the  world,  but  begat 
sons  and  daughters,  and  discharged  the  varied 
duties  of  his  station  in  life.  He  was  accounted 
a  prophet,  and  the  epistle  of  Jude  shows  that  he 
foretold  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  It  is  said  after- 
ward of  Noah,  as  now  of  Enoch,  that  he  "  walked 
with  God,"  and  of  no  other  in  the  history  is  this 
affirmation  made.  Enoch  was  translated,  as  we 
learn  in  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  did  not 
see  death.  In  his  walking  with  God  we  have 
Eden  partially  restored.  We  are  told  that  Me- 
thuselah lived  to  be  nine  hundred  and  sixty-nine 
years  old.  We  have  no  warrant  for  supposing 
that  at  that  time  a  year  stood  for  a  month  now,  or 
that  there  was  any  real  difference  in  the  style  of 
recounting  time.  Perhaps  the  tree  of  life  gave 
the  proper  support  to  the  human  constitution, 
and,  perhaps  also,  bodily  vigor  was  greater  in 
that  primeval  period  than  now.  There  is  no  good 
reason  for  doubting  that,  by  a  proper  observance 
of  all  human  laws,  human  life  might  be  much 
more  prolonged  than  it  is  in  our  time ;  but  such  a 
prolongation  would  not  be  an  immixed  blessing. 
It  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  a  life  spent  in  the 
primeval  simplicity  of  the  days  of  Methuselah. 
We  live  more  in  a  decade  now,  with  our  steam- 
ships, railways,  telegraphs,  telephones,  and  all 
the  other  multiplied  activities  of  the  closing  days 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  than  Methuselah  could 
have  lived  in  a  millennium.  Wc  can  truly  say 
with  Bailey  in  his  "  Festus"  : 


94  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

"We  live  in  deeds,  not  years;  in  thoughts,  not  breaths; 
In  feelings,  not  in  figures  on  a  dial. 
We  should  count  time  by  heart-throbs.     He  most  lives 
Who  thinks  most,  feels  the  noblest,  acts  the  best." 

The  Downward  Trend, 

A  long  period  has  elapsed  since  the  creation  of 
Adam  before  we  reach  Noah,  perhaps  not  less 
than  fifteen  hundred  years.  We  are  now  told^ 
at  the  opening  of  the  sixth  chapter  of  Genesis, 
that  the  race  had  made  great  progress  in  moral 
evil.  We  shall  soon  see  that  God  is  preparing 
to  inflict  summary  vengeance  on  the  guilty,  if 
they  will  not  listen  to  the  voice  of  His  servant 
Noah,  and  repent  of  their  evil  ways.  The  diver- 
gence between  the  two  lines  of  human  character 
to  which  reference  has  been  made  has  now  be- 
come very  marked,  but  as  the  race  began  rapid- 
ly to  multiply  the  representatives  of  the  two 
classes  came  into  close  relation.  Corrupt  men 
partook  in  a  remarkable  degree  of  the  worst  qual- 
ities of  the  fallen  Adam.  The  purpose  of  the 
sacred  writer  is  to  trace  to  its  fountain-head  the 
stream  of  corruption  which  resulted  finally  in 
bringing  the  deluge  upon  the  world  of  the  ungod- 
ly. Promiscuous  marriages  he  emphasizes  as  the 
chief  cause  of  general  degeneracy,  and  of  hasten- 
ing the  judgment  of  God.  One  of  the  old  divines 
has  wxll  said  that  "  but  for  the  deluge  of  sin  there 
had  not  been  a  deluge  of  water. "  To  inequality 
in  the  yoke  of  marriage,  the  union  of  believers 


SOA'S   OF  GOD  AND   DAUGHTERS   OF  MEN.     95 

with  infidels,  of  the  pious  with  the  profane,  was 
due  this  superfluity  of  wickedness.  Inequality 
in  marital  relations  led  to  inequality  in  all  the  re- 
lations of  life.  Unequal  marriag-es  resulted  in  the 
birth  of  impious  sons  and  daughters,  rather  than 
of  sons  and  daughters  of  God. 

The  Sons  of  God. 

Who  are  meant  by  the  "  sons  of  Elohim,"  men- 
tioned in  this  Scripture?  To  this  question  many 
and  contradictory  answers  have  been  given  ;  these 
questions  must  be  fairly  considered  in  their  order. 
Several  difficult  questions  arise  at  this  point. 
Who  were  the  "  daughters  of  men"?  Who  were 
th.e '' Nephilim'' ?  What  is  the  meaning  of  "  the 
Spirit's  striving  with  men"?  What  of  the  limita- 
tion to  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  ?  Several 
of  these  questions  will  later  receive  consideration  ; 
but  the  one  immediately  before  us  is  concerning 
the  "sons  of  God." 

Some  writers  have  said  that  they  were  sons  of 
princes  or  other  men  of  high  rank.  We  know 
that  in  Psalm  Ixxxii.  6  we  have  this  language 
when  it  might  have  that  interpretation.  But  does 
the  sacred  writer  here  mean  simply  to  say  that 
men  of  high  rank  degraded  themselves  by  marry- 
ing women  of  inferior  position?  This  opinion  was 
early  held  and  learnedly  advocated  by  Hebrew 
and  other  scholars,  and  in  later  times  it  was  care- 
fully elaborated  by  Schiller.  But  it  is  now  held 
by  very  few  commentators  of  wide  reputation, 


gS  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

careful  scholarvShip,  and  vSoimd  judgment.  It  may 
at  once  be  eliminated  from  our  discussion.  A 
second  interpretation  is,  that  the  "sons  of  Elo- 
him"  were  servants  and  worshippers  of  false  gods. 
Those  who  hold  this  view  make  the  word  Elohim 
mean  not  the  true  God,  but  idols;  they  also  make 
the  servants  or  worshippers  of  these  false  gods  to 
be  the  descendants  of  some  pre-Adamite  race. 
This  view,  therefore,  is  obliged  to  assume  differ- 
ent centres  of  creation  and  various  orders  of  cre- 
ated beings.  If  it  could  be  proved  that  there  was 
a  pre-Adamitc  race,  new  meaning  would  be  given 
to  Romans  v.  14:  "Nevertheless  death  reigned 
from  Adam  to  Moses,  even  over  them  that  had 
not  sinned  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression."  That  view  makes  the  "  daughters  of 
men"  to  be  the  daughters  of  the  Adamites,  as  con- 
tradistinguished from  the  sons  of  the  pre-Adam- 
ites.  It  holds  that  the  women  thus  descended 
from  Adam  were  true  in  their  spiritual  faith  and 
worship,  but  were  now  perverted  by  their  mar- 
riage with  idolatrous  men.  This  opinion  has  been 
supported  with  striking  ingenuity.  It  quite  re- 
verses the  ordinary  explanation  of  both  the  classes 
mentioned  in  the  narrative.  The  earlier  chapters 
of  Genesis,  however,  confine  our  attention  simply 
to  the  Adamites. 

A  third  interpretation  is  that  which  under- 
stands by  the  phrase  "sons  of  Elohim,"  angels. 
This  explanation  requires  careful  consideration ; 
and  it  is  not  so  easily  disposed  of  as  the  others, 


SOA^S   OF  GOD  AND   DAUGHTERS   OF  MEN.     97 

to  which  attention  has  been  directed.  It  was 
held  by  some  Hebrew  scholars  of  the  early  days 
and  of  well-known  repute;  it  was  also  emphati- 
cally taught  by  many  of  the  Christian  fathers,  and 
in  our  day  by  the  learned  Delitzsch,  by  Kurtz,  and 
by  so  popular  a  writer  as  Canon  Farrar.  We 
know  also  that  Byron,  in  his  "  Mystery  of  Cain," 
has  taken  advantage  of  this  interpretation  for 
some  of  his  finest  dramatic  effects;  and  that 
Moore  in  his  "  Loves  of  the  Angels"  has  with 
glowing  imagery,  poetical  fervor,  and  rhetorical 
beauty  embodied  this  theory,  which  may  be  so 
presented  as  to  be  attractive,  but  at  other  times 
is  simply  monstrous.  It  is  only  fair  to  those  hold- 
ing this  view  that  the  grounds  upon  which  they 
maintain  it  should  be  stated.  They  affirm  that 
generally  in  the  Old  Testament  the  phrase,  "  the 
sons  of  God,"  is  a  name  for  the  angels;  and  it  is 
frankly  admitted  by  those  who  oppose  the  theory 
that  at  times  the  phrase  is  so  used  in  the  Old- 
Testament  Scriptures.  But  with  equal  earnest- 
ness it  is  denied  that  it  always  has  this  mean- 
ing. It  will  scarcely  be  claimed  that  this  is  the 
necessary  meaning  even  in  Psalm  xxix.  i,  or 
Psalm  Ixxxix.  6 ;  but  that  this  is  its  meaning  in 
Job  xxxviii.  7,  and  in  Daniel  iii.  25,  is  generally  ad- 
mitted. In  these  two  places  the  phrase  with  its 
context  certainly  refers  to  angels.  The  strongest 
argument  in  favor  of  this  interpretation  is  found 
in  the  epistle  of  Jude,  and  in  2  Peter  ii.  4.  Per- 
haps both  these  writers  refer  to  the  same  apos- 
7 


98  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

tasy.  Jude  quotes  from  the  book  of  Enoch,  which 
apparently  indorses  this  view.  It  seems  clear 
that  angels  possessed  the  power  of  assuming  the 
human  form.  Without  doubt  this  interpretation 
gave  rise  to  many  of  the  heathen  mythologies  re- 
garding the  relation  of  the  gods  above  to  men 
and  women  on  the  earth ;  and  the  heroes  of  clas- 
sical story  are  generally  supposed  to  have  found 
their  origin  in  fantastic  legends  of  this  character ; 
so  also  probably  had  the  vague  myths  of  the 
Incubi  and  Succubi  of  the  Middle  Ages.  But 
there  is  so  mythical  a  character  to  these  stories 
of  the  loves  of  the  fallen  angels  with  the  daugh- 
ters of  men  that  it  becomes  difficult  to  receive 
such  an  interpretation  of  a  passage  of  Scripture. 
To  this  view  reference  will  again  be  made  a  little 
later. 

A  fourth  interpretation  is  that  which  under- 
stands by  the  phrase  "  sons  of  God"  the  descend- 
ants of  Seth,  and  by  the  "  daughters  of  men"  un- 
godly women.  Who,  then,  are  the  *'  sons  of  God"? 
A  host  of  commentators,  some  ancient,  nearly  all 
of  the  leading  reformers,  and  many  scholars  of  the 
present  day  on  both  sides  of  the  sea,  adopt  this 
view.  They  make  the  descendants  of  Seth  to 
marry  the  descendants  of  Caifi,  and  to  this  min- 
gling of  the  races  they  refer  the  corruptions  which 
preceded  the  flood.  These  are  called  the  sons  of 
God  because  they  have  the  spirit  or  disposition 
of  God.  Those  mentioned  in  Job  xxxviii.  7,  as 
joining  in  the  symphony  of  the  universe,  seem  to 


SO.VS   OF   GOD   AXD    DAUGHTERS   OF  MKX.     99 

be  an  order  of  ereatures  existing-  before  the  crea- 
tion of  man.  As  holy  beings  they  might  well  be 
called  the  "sons  of  God. "  Those  referred  to  in 
the  Scripture  we  are  especially  considering  ap- 
proached God  with  appropriate  offerings.  They 
rightly  called  upon  His  name ;  and,  like  Enoch, 
they  in  some  measure  daily  walked  with  God. 
By  ancestry  they  were  nominally  the  "  sons  of 
God,"  and  in  actual  life  they  were  personally  the 
"sons  of  God."  We  know  that  the  word  son  is 
often  used  in  Scripture  to  describe  a  variety  of 
relations.  When  Seth  was  born  he  was  recog- 
nized as  given  in  the  place  of  Abel,  and  so,  in  a 
special  sense,  was  the  son  of  God.  We  have  al- 
ready seen  that  when  Enos  was  born  men  began 
to  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord.  They  were 
thus  set  apart  as  standing  in  a  special  relation  to 
God.  They  were  believers ;  they  walked  not  after 
the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit.  They  were  born 
of  the  Spirit,  were  led  by  the  Spirit,  and  so  were 
the  ''  sons  of  God. "  They  thus  had  the  lofty  qual- 
ities of  likeness  to  God.  Here  was  already  the 
essential  idea  of  the  church  of  God.  These  men 
were  the  salt  of  the  earth ;  and,  when  they  con- 
tracted promiscuous  marriages  with  the  heathen- 
ized races  about  them,  they  brought  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  world  into  the  church  of  God.  We 
cannot,  therefore,  think  that  they  were  angels  in 
the  usual  sense  of  that  term.  We  are  distinctly, 
informed  that  the  angels  neither  marry  nor  give 
in  marriage  (Matthew  xxii.30).     The  teaching  of 


TOO  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Scripture  seems  to  be  that  angels  have  no  distinc- 
tion of  sex,  and  have  not  the  sexual  affections 
characteristic  of  men ;  and,  moreover,  we  cannot 
conceive  of  different  species,  even  of  earthly  crea- 
tures, being  attracted  to  one  another  in  these  re- 
lationships. Much  less  can  we  suppose  that  su- 
perhuman spirits  would  have  affectional  desires 
after  human  creatures.  The  whole  narrative  im- 
plies that  we  are  in  the  region  of  humanity,  and 
not  of  angelic  beings.  If  these  were  good  angels 
we  can  hardly  suppose  that  the}'  would  commit 
the  sin  here  charged,  and  we  cannot  suppose  that 
if  they  were  bad  angels  they  would  be  called  the 
"  sons  of  God."  We  are  not  to  give  this  interpre- 
tation to  the  statement  in  Jude,  except  it  be  im- 
possible otherwise  to  interpret  the  passage ;  and 
it  is  clear  that  there  is  no  absolute  necessity  for 
so  forced  an  explanation.  When  we  take  the 
phrase  "  sons  of  God"  to  mean  the  pious  Sethites, 
we  have  an  interpretation  which  is  natural,  con- 
sistent, and  scriptural ;  and  it  enables  us  to  avoid 
the  mythical  and  often  suggestively  monstrous 
exposition  which  makes  the  "  sons  as  of  God"  to 
be  angels. 

The  Daughters  of  Men. 

By  the  "  daughters  of  men"  we  need  not  under- 
stand the  daughters  of  the  Cainitic  race  exclusive- 
ly; it  includes  the  daughters  of  men  generally. 
They  were  "the  daughters  of  Adam";  they  were 
the  daughters  of  the  profane  and  impious  race  of 


SO.VS   OF   GOD  AND  DAUGHTERS   OF  MEN.  loi 

the  "old  Adam";  they  had  in  them  the  n^iture  of 
the  fallen  Adam.  In  several  passages  of  the  New 
Testament  the  word  "  men"  is  used  as  equivalent 
to  fallen,  degenerate,  and  sinful  men.  These 
"  sons  of  God"  departed  from  the  precepts  of  their 
early  and  godly  training;  they  thus  relaxed  the 
strictness  of  their  religious  and  social  relations. 
They  yielded  to  the  fascinations  of  mere  physical 
beauty,  and  their  sin  was  that  of  promiscuous 
marriage,  irrespective  of  moral  and  spiritual  char- 
acter. 

Their  Sinful  Choice. 

They  were  governed  simply  by  what  was  pleas- 
ing to  the  eye,  as  was  Eve  when  she  partook  of 
the  forbidden  fruit.  Thus  it  came  to  pass  that 
"they  took  them  wives,  of  all  which  they  chose." 
Here  we  see  laxity  of  choice  without  discernment 
of  character.  It  has  been  well  said  that  they 
chose  wives,  "  not  from  the  godliness  of  their  lives, 
but  for  the  goodliness  of  their  looks. "  Social  man 
now  repeated  the  act  of  individual  man  in  the  first 
sin;  thus  socially  they  apostatized  from  God  as 
Adam  did  individually.  The  sensual  triumphed 
over  the  spiritual;  the  nobler  elements  of  the 
marital  relations  were  debased  to  the  level  of 
mere  physical  attractions.  Thus  God's  professed 
people  destroyed  the  last  hope  of  the  church  of 
that  day  by  their  profligacy.  It  was  folly  to  sup- 
pose that  ungodly  mothers  would  be  likely  to 
train  up  godly  children.     The  sin  of  promiscuous 


I02  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

marriages  opened  the  way  to  the  evils  which 
finally  overwhelmed  the  race.  Degeneracy  of  the 
whole  race  must  now  go  on  apace. 

Unequal    Yokings. 

We  have  already  seen  that  in  the  seventh  gen- 
eration Lamech  became  a  polygamist.  We  have 
also  seen  that  the  Cainitic  women  possessed  the 
charms  of  beauty,  grace,  and  other  forms  of  phys- 
ical attractiveness.  Their  very  names  indicate 
their  personal  charms ;  they  were  Adah  (beauty) , 
Zillah  (shade),  and  Naamah  (lovely).  These 
names  suggest  the  dominant  characteristics  of 
the  Cainitic  race.  Fascinated  by  the  charms  of 
beauty,  the  "sons  of  God"  cast  aside  all  religious 
principles.  They  were  ensnared  by  outward 
charms  rather  than  by  inward  character.  They 
did  not  deliberate  upon  the  consequences  of  their 
sensual  choices.  Young  men  and  women  commit 
similar  sins  to-day.  They  are  attracted  by  the 
charms  of  beauty,  by  the  graces  of  mere  intellec- 
tual culture,  and  by  the  fascinations  of  wealth  and 
station.  Many  a  woman  virtually  sells  body  and 
soul  for  a  title,  and  some  for  a  home ;  and  many 
a  man  sells  all  that  he  has  for  filthy  lucre.  Such 
marriages  are  not  marriages  in  the  eyes  of  God, 
and  perhaps  ought  not  to  be  so  considered  in  the 
eyes  of  men.  Many  young  men  and  women  enter 
the  marriage  relation  with  as  little  thought  as  if 
they  were  birds  of  the  air.  There  are  marriages 
which  ought  for  physical  reasons  to  be  forbidden 


SONS  OF  GOD  AND  DAUGHTERS  OF  MEN.    103 

by  the  laws  of  the  State.  We  pay  vastly  more 
attention  to  laws  of  pedigree,  heredity,  and  affin- 
ity among  animals  than  we  do  among  men  and 
women.  One's  heart  is  saddened  as  he  thinks  of 
the  reckless  manner  in  which  many  enter  the 
bonds  of  holy  matrimony.  It  is  sufficiently  diffi- 
cult for  a  man  to  climb  the  rugged  heights  of  fame 
when  his  wife  keeps  equal  step  by  his  side ;  but  it 
is  almost  impossible  for  him  to  climb  when  he 
must  drag  her  up  by  main  force.  Many  men  and 
women  become  engaged  in  early  youth,  the  man 
to  pursue  courses  of  liberal  education,  and  the 
woman  to  starve  in  the  daily  routine  of  domestic 
duties.  Soon  an  impassable  intellectual  chasm 
will  separate  them.  They  grow  apart,  and  broken 
lives  and  bleeding  hearts  are  the  inevitable  re- 
sult. Tennyson  in  "  Locksley  Hall"  tells  the  sad 
story : 

"He  will  hold  thee,  when  his  passion   shall  have  spent  its 
novel  force, 
Something  better  than  his  dog,  a  little  dearer  than  his 
horse." 

Often  the  case  is  reversed,  and  the  other  words  of 
Tennyson  have  their  sorrowful  application: 

"  As  the  husband  is,  the  wife  is  ;  thou  art  mated  with  a  clown, 
And  the  grossness  of  his  nature  will  have  weight  to  drag 
thee  down. " 

God  help  the  girls  who  marry  young  men  to  re- 
form them.  They  are  undertaking  a  tremendous 
responsibility.     God  help  the  girls  the  breath  of 


104  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

whose  lovers  is  tainted  with  intoxicating  drink. 
There  is  little  before  such  but  fearful  anxiety, 
hopeless  sorrow,  and  indescribable  grief.  Too 
often  in  the  marriage  relation  the  bad  corrupts 
the  good,  and  the  good  does  not  convert  the 
bad.  Wrecked  lives,  broken  homes,  and  bleeding 
hearts  are  the  almost  inevitable  results  of  such 
marriages.  O  Christian  men  and  women,  be  not 
unequally  yoked  with  unbelievers.  Marry  in 
the  Lord.  What  fellowship  can  light  have  with 
darkness,  the  church  with  the  world,  Christ  with 
Belial? 

Glorious  is  the  river  Rhone  as  it  leaps  from  the 
Rhone  glacier,  more  than  five  thousand  feet  above 
the  sea.  Turbid  are  its  waters  as  it  enters  Lake 
Geneva;  but  stand  on  this  bridge  and  watch  it  as 
it  issues  from  the  lake,  with  the  clearness  of 
heaven's  blue,  and  with  the  swiftness  of  an  ar- 
row. Nearly  two  miles  below  Geneva,  the  Arve, 
milky  with  powdered  granite,  pours  its  waters 
against  the  cerulean  Rhone.  The  Rhone  resists 
the  proposed  union.  Side  by  side  they  run  for 
many  miles,  the  milky  Arve  and  the  azure  Rhone. 
Slowly  but  surely  the  muddy  waters  of  the  Arve 
are  gaining  the  ascendancy.  Standing  upon  the 
bridge  at  Lyons  the  mighty  river  rolls  beneath 
us,  a  muddy,  milky  stream,  and  so  pours  its  wa- 
ters into  the  Gulf  of  Lyons,  after  its  course  of  six 
hundred  miles  has  been  rim.  God  help  us  that 
the  heavenly  purity  of  our  Christian  lives  may 
never  become  the  muddy  waters  of  earth,  when 


SOA/'S  OF  GOD  AND  DAUGHTERS  OF  MEN.    105 

the  streams  of  other  lives  are  mingled  with  ours 
in  our  marriage  relations.  God  help  our  young 
men  and  women  to  live  for  truth,  for  honor,  for 
love,  for  God,  for  Heaven ! 


VII. 


DOES    GOD    REPENT    AND    THE    SPIRIT 
WITHDRAW  ? 


VII. 
Does  God  Repent  and  the    Spirit  Withdraw? 

This  is  a  startling  heading  for  a  chapter  or  an 
article,  but  it  is  fully  justified  by  the  narrative  in 
the  sixth  chapter  of  Genesis,  beginning  with  the 
third  verse  and  ending  with  the  eighth  verse. 
The  human  race  is  approaching  a  fearful  crisis. 
The  cup  of  divine  judgment  is  almost  full.  The 
whole  race  is  on  probation.  Part  of  it  has  re- 
ceived God's  gracious  approbation,  but  the  greater 
part  must  suffer  His  righteous  reprobation.  We 
are  brought  face  to  face  with  the  terrible  fact  that 
man  is  unworthy  to  be  longer  the  tenant  of  the 
glorious  temple  erected  by  God  for  his  occupancy. 
It  is  difficult  to  exaggerate  the  language  of  the 
Scripture,  which  describes  man's  sinfulness  be- 
fore God.  Man  has  become  flesh  rather  than 
spirit;  and  the  temporal  and  sensual  have  tri- 
umphed over  the  spiritual  and  eternal.  Man  has 
become  renowned  for  violence  rather  than  honor- 
able for  reverence.  A  deluge  of  evil  will  be  fol- 
lowed by  a  deluge  of  water.  The  whole  race, 
with  the  exception  of  one  family,  must  suffer  the 
infliction  of  God's  righteous  judgment. 


no  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

The  Spirit  Ceasing  to  Strive. 

The  language  of  the  third  verse  of  this  chapter 
is  somewhat  obscure,  but  is  tremendously  solemn. 
We  suppose  the  spirit  here  named  is  the  RuacJi 
EloJiim.  Here,  as  already  taught  us  in  the  in- 
spired narrative,  the  plurality  of  the  Godhead  is 
implied.  When  we  read  the  words,  "Jehovah 
said,"  we  understand  that  God  spoke  to  Himself 
or  to  others  in  the  sacred  Trinity.  The  language 
is  equivalent  to  saying  that  God  purposed  or  re- 
solved upon  the  course  of  action  later  described. 
There  is  some  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  ex- 
act meaning  of  the  word  translated  "strive."  It 
may  mean  to  keep  down,  to  rule,  or  to  judge ;  it 
has  in  it  usually  the  thought  of  reproving  in  some 
judicial  sense.  It  might,  indeed,  mean  that  God's 
spirit  might  not  longer  be  humbled  by  dwelling 
in  man,  because  he  has  become  flesh.  By  flesh 
we  are  to  understand  sinful  beings,  and  not  sim- 
ply corporeal  creatures.  The  word  basJiar  is  here 
used  in  its  ethical  significance,  as  is  the  word 
sarks^  flesh,  in  the  New  Testament.  Possibly  the 
idea  of  the  carnal  man,  as  distinguished  from  the 
spiritual,  so  often  expressed  by  the  Apostle  Paul, 
has  its  origin  in  this  verse. 

It  is  a  solemn  but  blessed  fact  that  the  Spirit 
of  God  does  strive  with  men.  Our  Lord  taught 
us  that  one  of  the  offices  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  when 
He  should  come  in  His  fulness,  would  be  to  "re- 
prove the  world  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and 


DOES   GOD   REPENT?  HI 

of  judgment."  We  see  the  Spirit,  thus  early  in 
the  history  of  the  race,  engaged  in  this  blessed 
work.  In  the  negative  statement  contained  in 
this  verse  we  have  shining  forth  the  bright  light 
of  God's  mercy  to  sinful  man.  His  Spirit  comes 
to  illumine  their  darkness,  to  arouse  their  con- 
science, and,  if  possible,  to  win  their  affection  to 
truth  and  to  God.  We  cannot  too  strongly  em- 
phasize this  blessed  truth.  Graciously  does  the 
Spirit  call  to  mind  former  judgments;  lovingly 
does  He  present  persuasive  arguments,  and  re- 
peatedly does  He  emphasize  encouraging  prom- 
ises. During  the  period  of  one  hundred  and 
twenty  3^ears  the  Spirit  did  thus  intercede  for  God 
with  the  antediluvian  world.  But  the  striving  of 
the  Spirit  implies  resistance  on  the  part  of  men, 
and  that  resistance  may  so  increase  that  the  Spirit 
may  finally  entirely  withdraw.  The  Spirit's  with- 
drawal forbodes  temporal  and  eternal  destruction. 
There  certainly  is  a  point  beyond  which  He  will 
not  go  in  His  entreaties  with  men.  In  harmony 
with  our  freedom  and  God's  divine  purpose  the 
Spirit  will  not  exercise  force  on  the  wills  of  men. 
God  will  not  interfere  with  the  law  of  freedom 
which  He  has  established  in  His  control  with  free 
moral  agents.  Involuntary  obedience  is  not  obe- 
dience. Compulsory  love,  faith,  and  hope  are  a 
contradiction  in  terms.  The  Spirit  of  God  ceases 
to  strive  with  men  when  they  drive  him  from 
their  hearts.  The  whole  world  is  vocal  with 
God's  calls  of  mercy;  the  very  air  we  breathe  is 


112  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

laden  with  God's  gracious  ministries.  The  Spirit 
pleads,  wrestles,  and  even  agonizes  with  men. 
Nothing  in  human  thought  is  more  wonderful 
than  God's  patience  with  the  disobedient  and  re- 
bellious. The  history  of  the  world  is  a  history  of 
rebellion  against  God.  Think  of  the  sins  of  that 
antediluvian  world,  so  aggravated  and  so  heinous ! 
God  was  patient  with  men,  even  though  they  were 
ripe  for  destruction.  He  could  do  nothing  more 
then,  he  can  do  nothing  more  now  to  induce  men 
to  repent,  without  interfering  with  their  moral 
freedom.  The  Spirit  of  God  knocks  at  all  the 
doors  of  the  heart,  but  the  time  will  come  when 
He  will  depart  and  leave  men  to  the  terrible  fate 
which  they  have  brought  upon  themselves.  God 
condemns  no  soul  to  eternal  death;  men  bring 
condemnation  upon  themselves.  They  are  lost 
because  they  wish  to  be  lost ;  a  little  reflection 
will  show  that  this  statement  is  true  in  its  deepest 
mer.ning.  Every  man  will  go  where,  in  his  deep- 
est heart,  he  wishes  to  go.  God's  providence 
simply  registers  the  judgment  which  men  pass 
upon  themselves.  The  time  will  come,  if  men 
continue  to  resist  the  Spirit,  when  God  must  say 
of  each  soul,  ''  Cut  it  down,  why  cumbereth  it  the 
ground?"  We  all  may  well  pray  with  the  Psalm- 
ist, "  Take  not  thy  Holy  Spirit  from  me." 

We  now  see  that  God  declares  that  man's  days 
are  to  be  one  hundred  and  twenty  years.  It  seems 
clear  that  the  reference  here  is  not  to  the  life  of 
men,  but  to  that  of  the  race,  before  the  coming 


DOES  GOD   REPENT?  I13 

of  God's  primitive  judg-ment.  The  writer  goes 
back  to  a  point  of  time  already  passed  over,  the 
time  before  the  birth  of  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth ; 
one  hundred  years  intervened  between  their  birth 
and  the  flood.  It  thus  seems  certain  that  the  ref- 
erence is  to  the  period  of  grace  allowed  the  nation, 
because,  while  we  are  not  told  of  men  living,  after 
the  end  of  this  period,  nine  hundred  years  and 
upward,  we  know  that  Noah,  Abram,  and  others, 
from  Shem  to  Terah,  greatly  exceeded  the  limit 
of  one  hundred  and  twenty  years.  Man  is  thus 
seen  to  be  flesh,  to  be  dominantly  carnal;  the 
breath  which  the  Almighty  breathed  into  his  nos- 
trils is  triumphed  over  by  the  corporeal  nature. 
His  day  of  grace  is  therefore  limited.  By  his 
act  in  building  the  ark  as  well  as  by  his  word  in 
preaching  the  truth,  Noah  is  to  exhort,  warn,  and 
rebuke.  We  are  told  that  Noah  was  a  just  man, 
that  he  was  perfect  in  his  generation,  and  that 
he  walked  with  God;  these  are  certainly  marked 
qualities  of  excellence.  The  evening-  of  oppor- 
tunity has  come  to  the  doomed  race.  Their  cup 
is  rapidly  filling,  and  its  terrible  contents  will 
soon  be  poured  out. 

Who  Were  the  Giants  ? 

We  are  told  in  the  fourth  verse  that  there  "  were 
giants  in  the  earth  in  those  days."  These  were 
men  of  vigorous  bodies  and  of  violent  wills. 

The  word  translated  giants  is  rather  descriptive 
of  cruelty  than  of  great  strength.  These  giants 
8 


114  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

were  not  the  issue  of  the  promiscuous  marriages, 
to  which  reference  is  here  made,  for  they  existed 
before  that  time.  They  ought  not  then  to  be  con- 
founded with  the  children  of  these  mixed  mar- 
riages, as  the  latter  form  a  separate  class.  It  is 
perhaps  unfortunate  that  the  original  w^ord  is 
translated  by  our  word  giants.  The  Septuagint 
is  responsible  for  this  translation,  as  it  gives  us 
the  word  gigantes^  which  literally  signifies  earth- 
born,  but  we  have  translated  it  giants,  and  thus 
conveyed  the  idea  that  these  were  persons  of  enor- 
mous size.  The  Hebrew  w^ord  is  ncpJiilini ;  this 
word  is  derived  from  naphal,  meaning  to  fall.  It 
may  refer  to  apostates,  fallen  from  God  and  the 
true  faith,  and  then  to  violent  men,  such  as  ty- 
rants, usurpers,  and  oppressors,  who  fell  upon 
their  fellow-men.  Later  in  this  verse  we  have 
th.e gibboriin  ;  they  were  "  mighty  men,  impetuous, 
heroic  men."  The  whole  subject  of  the  Anakim^ 
NepJiiliin,  Gibborim^  Rcphaijn^  Einin^  and  Zuztjn, 
variously  translated  by  our  word  giants  and  by 
similar  terms,  is  obscure  to  a  remarkable  degree. 
Calvin  calls  these  men  "  the  first  nobility  of  the 
world ;  honorable  robbers,  who  boasted  of  their 
wickedness."  Some  have  doubted  whether  they 
were  men  of  large  physical  stature ;  but  perhaps 
it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  there  were  physical 
giants  in  that  early  day.  The  primitive  records 
of  most  nations  contain  stories  of  gigantic  men 
and  women.  This  is  true  of  Great  Britain  and 
most  European  countries.     The  possibility  of  gi- 


DOES  GOD  REPENT?  1 15 

gantic  human  creatures  is  in  harmony  with  the 
great  structures,  such  as  the  pyramids  and  the 
great  gates  of  ancient  cities;  and  geological  in- 
vestigations reveal  to  us  gigantic  ferns,  trees,  and 
mosses,  and  in  the  animal  kingdom  we  have  evi- 
dences of  the  megatherium  and  other  enormous 
creatures,  which  may  have  inhabited  the  world 
in  the  earlier  day. 

God  Vindicated. 

Beginning  with  the  fifth  verse  and  going  to  the 
end  of  the  eighth  verse,  we  have  a  striking  vindi- 
cation of  God  in  His  terrible  acts  of  judgment. 
We  see  here  that  God  did  not  act  in  haste,  and  as 
the  result  of  a  sudden  impulse.  We  are  told  that 
He  carefully  observed  the  wickedness  of  His  crea- 
tures. The  description  of  the  sinfulness  of  man 
is  minute  and  accurate.  The  sin  of  the  race  was 
not  local  and  limited,  and  was  not  characterized 
by  ordinary  corruption.  The  one  hundred  and 
twenty  years  of  grace  have  passed,  and  the  ini- 
quity of  man  was  widespread  and  deep-seated. 
Nothing  could  surpass  the  carefulness  of  the  de- 
scription here  given  of  man's  sin.  It  had  reached 
a  fearful  climax.  It  was  characterized  by  brutal 
outrage  and  abominable  lust.  We  are  told  at  the 
outset  that  men  had  become  flesh ;  that  they  no 
longer  discerned  their  high  destiny,  but  were 
brutalized  and  sensualized.  We  are  next  im- 
pressed with  the  fact  that  the  wickedness  of  men 
was  not  simply  an  accident  but  a  state.     They 


Ii6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

were  corrupt  within  and  without.  Their  wicked- 
ness,— ra'atli^  from  the  root  raa^  to  make  a  loud 
noise,  to  rage,  hence  to  be  wicked — "  was  multi- 
plied," and  it  was  continually  increasing.  Mar- 
vellously strong  is  the  statement  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  fifth  verse,  regarding  the  sinfulness 
of  "every  imagination  {yetser,  a  device)  of  the 
thoughts  of  his  heart."  We  are  here  taught  that 
the  very  materials  out  of  which  ideas  were  formed 
were  evil.  The  embryo  of  every  thought  was 
sinful ;  the  deepest  fountain  of  life  was  poisoned. 
The  picture  is  still  more  fully  darkened  by  the 
thought  that  this  unmixed  evil  was  without  in- 
terval of  good.  It  was  evil  continually,  literally, 
every  day.  This  is  the  most  terrific  picture  of 
fallen  souls  to  be  found  in  any  literature.  The 
more  carefully  one  studies  the  w^ords  of  the  origi- 
nal, the  more  awful  does  the  picture  become. 
Instead  of  having  the  excellences  of  a  Seth,  an 
Enoch,  or  a  Noah,  we  have  men  and  women 
possessed  of  the  darkest  features  of  a  diabolical 
character,  which  the  strongest  Hebrew  words  can 
describe. 

God  Repenting. 

We  are  not  surprised  that  we  should  read  in  the 
sixth  verse  that  "  it  repented  Jehovah  that  he  had 
made  man  on  the  earth,  and  it  grieved  him  at  his 
heart."  These  are  startling  words.  How  are  we 
to  understand  this  language?  Can  God  repent? 
Do  not  the   Scriptures  say  that  He  cannot?     In 


DOES  GOD  REPENT?  H? 

Numbers  xxiii.  19  we  read:  "God  is  not  a  man, 
that  he  should  lie ;  neither  the  son  of  man,  that 
he  should  repent.      Hath  he  said  and  shall  he  not 
do  it,  or  hath  he  spoken  and  shall  he  not  make  it 
good?"     And  in  i  Samuel  xv.  29  we  read:  "And 
also  the  strength  of  Israel  will  not  lie  nor  repent ; 
for   he   is   not  a  man    that   he    should   repent." 
These  are  strong  words.     Can  a  God  of  infinite 
perfection  be  grieved  at  His  heart?     Does  not  the 
suggestion  even  of  this  possibility  detract  from 
the  glory  of  God's  perfection?     If  rightly  under- 
stood we   shall  find  that  this  language  gives  us 
new,    tender,    and    beautiful    conceptions  of   the 
mighty  and  loving  God  our  Saviour.     We  have 
here  an  illustration  of  what  has  been  called  the 
frankness,    even    the    imprudence,    of   Scripture. 
Scripture  must  be  compared  with   Scripture,  in 
order  that  we  may  get  its  teaching  in  entirety. 
The   word  yinnalicvi,  repented,    is  from  naham, 
to  pant,  to  groan,  and   finally  to  grieve.      It  re- 
minds us  of  the  German  raien  and  the  English 
rue.     Let   us    remember   that   when   repentance 
is  ascribed  to  God  we  must  not  suppose  that  it 
implies    a   change  of  purpose  in  the    Almighty. 
When  we  attribute  this  act  to  God  it  is  expres- 
sive of  our  conception  of  God  rather  than  of  God's 
essential  character.      The  language  is  rather  the 
manner  of  men ;  it  is  simply  and  frankly  anthro- 
popathic  speech.     Thus  understood  it  is  perfectly 
intelligible.     W^e  cannot  speak  of  God  o-r  to  God, 
or  He  to  us,  unless  language  is  adopted  which  we 


Il8  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

can  understand.  As  far  back,  however,  as  the 
days  of  the  vSeventy  an  attempt  was  made  to  soften 
this  language ;  but  such  an  attempt  is  utterly  un- 
necessary to  a  true  understanding  of  the  Scrip- 
ture. In  harmony  with  the  anthropopathic  prin- 
ciple, it  speaks  of  God's  hands,  eyes,  ears,  and 
feet.  The  meaning  simply  is,  that  God  has  power 
to  perform  the  acts  which  we  perform  in  the  use 
of  these  parts  of  our  bodies.  Thus  the  Scripture 
represents  Him  as  exercising  the  passions  of 
anger,  love,  and  grief  which  we  discover  in  our- 
selves unavoidably.  We  must  reason  about  God 
in  the  use  of  comparison  and  analogy.  Repent- 
ance in  God  is  a  change  in  His  attitude  toward 
men,  rather  than  a  change  in  His  mind  and  will. 
An  old  divine  thus  speaks:  "Repentance  with 
man  is  the  change  of  will ;  repentance  with  God  is 
the  willing  of  a  change. "  The  language  used  here 
of  God  gives  us  a  wonderful  picture  of  the  tender- 
ness of  His  fatherly  heart.  His  heart  is  grieved 
ev^en  when  he  permits  the  blow  of  justice  to  fall. 
It  has  been  well  said  that  "  though  the  divine  pur- 
pose is  immutable,  the  divine  nature  is  not  im- 
passable."  God's  heart  is  pitiful  as  the  heart  of 
the  tenderest  earthly  father,  and  gentle  as  that  of 
the  most  loving  mother.  We  are  sure  that  not 
until  men  rejected,  grieved,  and  despised  His 
Holy  Spirit  was  the  punishment  of  their  sin  in- 
flicted. We  must  not  deny  to  God  the  attributes 
of  freedom,  personality,  holiness,  and  justice. 
We  may  be  sure  that  this  statement  regarding 


DOES  GOD  REPENT?  II9 

God,  in  some  way  not  fully  known  to  us,  implies 
processes  analogous  to  those  of  the  human  heart 
and  will.  In  God  are  found  attributes  which  to 
us  may  seem  to  be  inharmonious  and  contradit- 
tory,  but  which  in  Him  are  in  eternal  and  glori- 
ous unison. 

Righteous    Noah. 

The  eighth  verse  teaches  us  that  "  Noah  found 
grace  in  the  eyes  of  Jehovah."  The  various  de- 
scriptions of  Noah  in  this  connection  are  pecul- 
iarly attractive.  They  set  him  before  us  as  a  man 
of  a  beautifully  balanced  character.  His  name 
means  "rest,"  or  "consolation,"  and  probably  in 
giving  it  his  father  believed  that  he  was  the  prom- 
ised deliverer.  The  old  man's  sad  heart  turns 
with  hope  to  the  birth  of  his  son ;  but  Lamech 
was  deceived  in  his  hope  regarding  Noah,  as  Eve 
was  mistaken  in  the  birth  of  Cain.  Nevertheless 
we  feel  the  charm  of  Noah's  beautiful  name.  He 
was  the  tenth  from  Adam  in  the  line  of  Seth.  He 
is  the  first  man  whom  the  Scriptures  call  "just." 
We  are  glad  to  read  that  he  found  grace  in  the 
sight  of  Jehovah.  For  the  first  time  "grace," 
which  in  evangelical  theology  has  so  tender  and 
beautiful  a  meaning,  finds  expression  in  a  word. 
God's  love,  revealing  itself  in  human  character  in 
Abel,  in  Enoch,  and  in  Noah,  here  reaches  a  higher 
elevation. 

We  now  have  revealed  to  us  the  blessed  foun- 
tain whence  comes  true  nobility  of  character  and 


I20  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

likeness  to  God.  Noah  was  a  preacher  of  right- 
eousness. This  truth  must  ever  be  emphasized, 
and  the  passage  in  i  Peter  iii.  18-20  should  be 
studied  in  the  light  of  this  antediluvian  history, 
personal  and  general.  We  there  learn  that  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  through  the  instrumentality  of 
the  pious  patriarch,  preached  to  the  disobedient 
spirits  of  the  old  world.  This  passage  occupies 
a  prominent  place  in  modern  theological  discus- 
sions. It  has  been  cited  in  support  of  a  second 
probation,  and  in  proof  of  a  purgatory.  We 
ought  to  bear  in  mind  that  the  spirits,  to  whom 
reference  is  thus  made,  are  the  souls  of  those  men 
in  prison  who  once  heard  the  Gospel,  and  enjoyed 
the  opportunity  but  rejected  the  duty  of  repent- 
ance. By  the  Spirit  of  Christ  we  may  understand 
either  the  Holy  Spirit  or  the  divine  nature  of 
Christ.  These  men  were  the  sinners  destroyed 
by  the  flood ;  their  spirits,  shades,  or  manes.,  were 
popularly  supposed  to  be  imprisoned  in  the  caves 
of  the  earth.  To  these  spirits  Christ,  through 
Noah,  preached  during  their  lifetime.  The  fables 
of  the  Greeks  that  the  earthquakes  were  caused 
by  the  efforts  of  imprisoned  giants  to  shake  off 
the  mountains  heaped  upon  them,  have  their  ori- 
gin in  the  tradition  respecting  the  fate  of  these 
antediluvian  rebels,  who  were  shut  up  in  subter- 
ranean regions  because  of  their  rebellion  against 
God.  These  antediluvian  sinners  were  those 
"  which  some  time  (once  or  formerly)  were  diso- 
bedient";  "the  long-suffering  of  God  waited  in 


DOES   GOD   REPENT?  1 21 

the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  a  preparing." 
If  Christ  had  gone  after  His  death  and  had 
preached  to  these  spirits,  we  should  have  read, 
"waited  until  after  Christ's  death." 

Scholars  have  given  us  examples  from  Demos- 
thenes and  other  Greek  writers,  as  well  as  from 
the  Scriptures,  to  show  that  the  phrase,  *'  he  went 
and  preached,"  is  simply  a  pleonasm  for  "he 
preached."  "We  have  a  suggestive  example  of 
this  construction  in  Ephesians  ii.  15-17,  "having 
abolished  .  .  .  came  and  preached  peace  to  you 
which  were  afar  off,  and  to  them  that  were  nigh." 
It  is  certain  that  after  His  resurrection  Christ  did 
not  personally  go  to  the  Gentiles  to  preach  to 
them ;  He  went  by  His  apostles.  We  are  familiar 
with  the  Latin  phrase,  Qui  facit  per  aliuin^  facit 
per  se.  Paul  in  waiting  to  the  Ephesians  repre- 
sents Christ  as  doing  that  which  He  did  do  through 
His  apostles.  In  like  manner  Peter  represents 
Christ  as  doing  that  which  He  did  through  Noah. 
Peter  spoke  of  the  antediluvians  who  at  the  time 
he  wrote  w^ere  spirits  in  prison ;  that  is  certainly 
the  fair  meaning  of  his  words.  This  is  the  only 
passage  in  the  New  Testament  on  which  the  Ro- 
man doctrine  of  purgatory  is  supposed  to  rest ;  it 
is  tlie  passage  also  on  which  some  base  their  be- 
lief in  a  second  probation.  It  is  also  one  author- 
ity for  the  clause  in  the  so-called  Apostles'  Creed 
relating  to  the  descent  into  hell ;  but  we  know 
that  this  creed  was  repeated  for  hundreds  of  years 
before  this  clause  was  introduced.     No  one  knows 


122  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

by  whom  or  when  it  was  inserted.  In  its  present 
form,  this  creed  cannot  be  traced  to  a  period 
earlier  than  about  the  middle  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury. This  scripture  is  certainly  a  foundation  of 
sand  for  both  these  groundless  theories.  The 
argument  from  this  passage,  promising  a  second 
probation  to  those  who  die  in  ignorance  of  Christ, 
is  wholly  irrelevant.  These  spirits  in  prison  did 
not  die  in  ignorance  of  God's  word  and  will;  for 
they  had  frequent  and  solemn  warnings.  Divine 
patience  waited  until  divine  mercy  was  exhausted. 
Even  if  it  be  granted  that  Christ  did  in  person 
preach  in  hades,  there  is  no  evidence  that  any 
spirits  there  confined  repented  or  were  liberated 
therefrom.  This  passage  suggests  hopelessness 
rather  than  hopefulness,  even  granting,  what  is 
not  taught  in  Scripture,  that  Christ  did  teach  in 
person  in  the  region  of  lost  souls.  We  know  that 
but  one  voice  came  from  that  dark  region,  as 
taught  us  by  our  Lord,  and  it  was  a  voice  of  hope- 
less misery  and  of  sinful  unbelief;  that  voice  gives 
us  the  only  example  in  the  Bible  of  a  prayer  offered 
to  a  saint,  and  that  prayer  came  from  hell  and  was 
never  answered.  Romanists  certainly  have  not 
much  encouragement  to  pray  to  saints. 

Solemn  are  the  echoes  coming  to  us  from  the 
antediluvian  world.  Does  God's  Spirit  strive 
with  any  to-day?  Grieve  not  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Quench  not  the  heavenly  flame.  Resist  not  the 
loving  voice.  Joyously  yield  to  the  gracious 
promptings  of  the  divine  Spirit.      Let  the  prayer 


DOES   GOD   REPENT?  1 23 

of  every  heart  be,  with  the  deepest  tenderness  and 
solicitude,  that  of  the  Psalmist  in  his  sincere  re- 
pentance, "  Cast  me  not  awa)^  from  thy  presence, 
and  take  not  thy  Holy  Spirit  from  me." 


VIII. 

WAS    THE    NOACHIAN    FLOOD    UNIVERSAL 
OR    LOCAL? 


VIII. 

WAS    THE    NOACHIAN    FLOOD    UNIVER- 
SAL   OR  LOCAL? 

Thp:  account  of  the  ark,  the  deluge,  the  assuag- 
ing of  the  waters,  and  God's  covenant  with  Noah 
is  found  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  sixth,  seventh, 
and  eighth  chapters.  We  have  already  seen  that 
the  cup  of  God's  righteous  judgment  was  full. 
The  deluge  of  sin  is  now  about  to  bring  a  deluge 
of  water ;  but  it  is  to  be  a  lustral  wave  that  shall 
sweep  over  the  corrupt  earth.  We  are  familiar 
with  the  covenant  given  to  Noah  to  prepare  an 
ark  and  to  enter  therein  with  his  family. 

The    Ark. 

It  is  difficult  to  know  the  exact  meaning  of  the 
Hebrew  word  tcbatJi^  translated  ark.  The  word 
is  found  only  here  and  in  Exodus  ii.  3,  where  it  is 
applied  to  the  basket  in  which  the  mother  of 
Moses  laid  her  babe.  A  different  word  is  used, 
aron^  for  the  ark  of  the  covenant  (Exodus  xxv. 
10).  The  ark  which  Noah  was  commanded  to 
make  was  to  consist  of  gopher  or  cypress  wood,  if 
we  mean  any  particular  species  of  tree ;  this  wood, 
because  of  its  lightness  and  durability,  the  Phoeni- 
cians used  for  building  their  vessels,  the  Athenians 


128  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

their  coffins,  and  the  Eg-yptians  their  mnmmy- 
cases.  These  trees  were  such  as  contained  pitch, 
turpentine,  and  similar  resinous  materials.  We 
know  that  the  ark  was  divided  into  a  number  of 
small  compartments  placed  in  three  tiers,  and  we 
also  know  that  light  was  admitted  through  open- 
ings called  windows ;  but  great  obscurity  attaches 
to  the  word  tzoJiar^  translated  window.  It  is 
likely  that  it  was  a  series  of  light  and  air  holes  of 
lattice-work.  A  different  word  is  used  for  the 
window,  Jialon.,  which  Noah  is  said  to  have  opened 
at  the  end  of  forty  days.  The  word  tzoJiar  implies 
that  the  window  was  in  some  way  connected  with 
the  transmission  of  light,  as  it  comes  from  a  root 
meaning  shining.  It  was  probably  a  collective 
term  for  skylights,  in  "which  there  may  have  been 
revolving  lattices,  or  some  transparent  substance 
with  which  we  are  not  familiar.  The  door  of  the 
ark  must  have  been  of  considerable  size  to  admit 
the  various  animals,  and  it  must  also  have  been 
above  the  highest  point  which  the  water  v.  ould 
reach ;  perhaps  the  word  translated  door  is  also  to 
be  used  in  a  collective  sense,  implying  a  number 
of  openings  in  the  different  stories  of  the  ark. 

We  are  told  that  the  ark  was  300  cubits  long,  50 
cubits  wide,  and  30  cubits  high.  What  was  the 
length  of  a  cubit?  The  cubit  later  in  Jewish  his- 
tory came  to  be  six  hand-breadths,  or  about 
twenty-one  inches ;  this  was  known  as  the  sacred 
cubit,  although  there  was  a  common  cubit  of  eigh- 
teen inches.     Taking  the  longer  of  these  measures 


IVAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR   LOCAL?     129 

as  correct,  the  ark  would  be  525  feet  long,  87  feet 
wide,  and  52  feet  and  6  inches  high.  The  Great 
Eastei'ii  is  680  feet  long,  691  on  deck,  83  feet 
wide,  and  58  feet  deep.  The  ark  was  intended 
only  to  float,  to  have  ample  storage,  and  to  keep 
reasonably  steady  on  the  waters.  It  was  a  great 
oblong  floating  house,  a  building  in  the  form  of  a 
parallelogram.  It  was  without  sails  or  rudder ;  it 
was  not  a  boat  in  any  modern  sense.  It  has  been 
estimated  that  it  would  carry  at  least  20,000  men 
w4th  ample  provision  for  six  months,  besides  eigh- 
teen pieces  of  cannon.  It  was  not,  of  course,  in- 
tended to  move  rapidly  through  the  waters.  We 
are  told  that  Peter  Jansen,  a  Dutch  Mennonite 
merchant,  constructed  in  the  year  1609,  at  Hoorn, 
a  vessel  on  the  same  model  as  the  ark.  His  vessel 
was  120  feet  long,  20  feet  broad,  and  12  feet  deep. 
It  is  also  said  to  have  been  well  adapted  to  freight- 
age, but  not  appropriate  for  a  long  voyage.  This 
great  vessel  failed  to  accomplish  any  practical 
purpose,  as  it  was  soon  broken  to  pieces  by  the 
waves.  The  ark  of  Noah  was  a  colossal  oblong 
chest,  smeared  with  bitumen,  and,  although  well 
suited  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was  con- 
structed, it  would  not  have  been  of  practical  ser- 
vice outside  of  that  purpose.  It  is  also  known 
that  several  vessels  called  fleutcn,  or  floats,  were 
built  in  Denmark  after  the  proportions  of  the  ark. 


130  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

The  Animals  in  the  Ark. 

Did  Noah  literally  take  into  the  ark  a  pair  of 
the  animals  of  the  whole  world?  The  answer  to 
this  question  depends  upon  the  question,  "  Was  the 
flood  universal  or  local?"  Could  all  the  animals 
of  the  world,  by  sevens  or  by  pairs,  with  food 
sufficient  for  a  year,  have  been  stored  away  in  the 
ark?  This  question  has  been  often  asked,  and  de- 
tailed mathematical  answers  have  been  frequently 
given.  Hugh  Miller,  in  his  "  Testimony  of  the 
Rocks,"  takes  up  the  question  in  a  practical  way. 
He  quotes  Sir  Walter  Raleigh's  calculations  on 
the  subject,  but  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  Sir 
Walter  proposed  space  for  less  than  one  hundred 
distinct  species  of  creatures.  His  calculations 
are  remarkably  interesting,  as  he  arranges  the 
animals  in  one  story,  the  birds  in  another,  and 
the  provisions  in  another,  with  ample  space  for 
Noah  and  his  family.  There  were  still  earlier 
classifications  of  animals  and  birds,  making  the 
number  of  species  larger  than  that  given  by  Sir 
Walter  Raleigh;  but  the  knowledge  which  we 
now  possess  of  the  animal  kingdom  throws  all 
these  calculations  into  utter  confusion.  Buffon 
made  the  distinct  species  of  animals  and  birds 
double  what  Sir  Walter  reckoned;  and  now,  so 
astonishing  is  the  progress  made,  we  should 
have  to  make  the  number  of  species  many  times 
greater  than  that  which  Buffon  gives.  A  great 
world  is  open  to  us  which  was  entirely  unknown 


Jf'AS    THE  FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR   LOCAL?     131 

even  a  few  generations  ago.  Vast  discoveries  are 
made  in  every  department  of  inquiry.  These 
facts  incidentally  show,  what  later  will  be  proved 
from  other  considerations,  that  the  flood  was  only 
local  and  not  general,  only  partial  and  not  uni- 
versal. To  believe  that  the  flood  was  universal  is 
to  believe  in  continuous  miracles  of  the  most 
stupendous  character,  and  miracles  as  needless 
for  the  moral  purpose  for  which  the  flood  came  as 
they  would  have  been  gigantic  in  themselves. 
All  who  believe  in  an  infinite  God  believe  that 
He  could  have  performed  all  these  miracles.  The 
only  question  is.  Did  He  perform  them?  From 
all  that  we  know  of  God's  methods  we  are  abun- 
dantly warranted  in  saying  that  He  is  invariably 
economical  in  the  displays  of  His  power,  and  that 
He  thus  always  keeps  the  miraculous  element  at 
a  minimum. 

Then  we  have,  if  we  believe  in  a  universal 
flood,  to  get  the  animals  from  the  ends  of  the 
earth.  This  could  not  be  done,  except  again  by 
continuous  miracles  of  an  enormous  nature. 
Once  it  was  held  that  all  the  animals  which  now 
are  found  in  all  parts  of  the  globe  originally  pro- 
ceeded from  some  common  centre,  such  as  the 
ark  might  easily  have  occupied ;  but  no  reputable 
zoologist,  no  reasonably  intelligent  man,  reason- 
ably well  acquainted  with  the  numbers  and  dis- 
tribution of  species,  will  venture  now  to  express 
such  an  opinion.  Attention  has  often  been  called 
by  writers  on  this  subject  to  the  fact  that  South 


132  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

America  has  animals  totally  distinct  from  those  of 
Europe,  Asia,  or  Africa,  and  Australia  has  a 
whole  class  of  marsupials  utterly  unknown  in 
other  parts  of  the  world.  New  Zealand  has  birds 
so  ill-provided  with  wings  that  they  can  only  run 
on  the  ground.  It  is  also  affirmed  by  competent 
authorities  that  this  remarkable  distribution  of 
species  existed  long  before  the  period  of  the 
deluge. 

False  Views  of  God. 

It  is  astonishing  that  some  interpreters  of  the 
Bible  think  that  they  honor  God  and  the  Bible  by 
taxing  our  credulity  to  the  utmost,  when  the  fact 
is  that  by  so  doing  they  dishonor  both  God  and  the 
Bible.  They  put  God,  to  some  degree  at  least, 
into  the  category  of  heathen  deities,  delighting  in 
vast  displays  of  power,  without  necessity,  without 
reason,  and  without  wisdom;  and  they  do  some- 
thing toward  reducing  the  Bible  to  a  level  with 
the  senseless  legends  of  barbaric  gods  and  myth- 
ological deities.  We  ought  to  thank  God  for  the 
larger  element  of  sanctified  common  sense  which 
now  enters  into  the  interpretations  of  the  oracles 
of  God.  This  element  honors  alike  God  and  the 
Bible.  Only  by  continuous  miracles  could  the 
animals  be  brought  into  the  ark.  How  could  the 
sloth  and  the  armadillo  have  been  brought  across 
continents  and  seas  from  their  home  in  South 
America?  How  the  kangaroo  from  the  forests 
and  prairies  of  Australia?     How  the  polar  bear 


IFAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR   LOCAL?     133 

from  the  icebergs  of  polar  regions?  How  were 
the  carnivorous  animals  supplied  with  food  dur- 
ing the  year's  abode  in  the  ark?  Were  these 
animals  miraculously  supplied  with  food?  Were 
their  teeth  and  digestive  organs  so  changed  that 
they  could  live  on  vegetables?  To  care  for  a  year 
for  even  the  limited  number  of  animals  w^hich 
have  their  home  in  Noah's  vicinity,  it  has  well 
been  said,  must  have  been  a  task  not  easy  of  ac- 
complishment. To  care  for 'all  the  animals  which 
would  have  been  collected  together,  if  the  flood 
were  universal,  would  have  been  absolutely  im- 
possible, except  by  daily  miracles  of  the  most 
enormous  character. 

But  was  not  Noah  told  to  take  two  of  every  liv- 
ing thing  of  all  flesh  into  the  ark?  Most  assuredly. 
But  how  would  he  understand  such  a  command? 
Would  it  suggest  to  him  armadillos  from  South 
America,  kangaroos  from  Australia,  polar  bears 
from  the  North  Pole?  Surely  not.  He  would 
understand  it — how  could  he  understand  it  other- 
wise?— to  mean  two  of  every  kind  known  to  him. 
Surely  he  was  not  a  zoological  professor.  Would 
any  one  with  sense,  except  for  a  few  misunder- 
stood expressions  in  the  narrative,  ever  suppose 
that  Noah  or  Moses  had  such  a  conception  of  the 
meaning  of  God's  words  as  a  belief  in  a  universal 
deluge  supposes?  Noah  and  Moses  could  hardly 
have  been  nineteenth-century  zoologists.  How 
could  they,  after  the  subsidence  of  the  flood,  have 
been  carried  back  to  the  distant  countries  whence 


134  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

they  came?  Who  could  have  transported  them? 
By  what  ships  or  railways  did  they  come  and  go? 
How  have  all  vestiges  of  their  journey  back  and 
forth  been  concealed?  It  is  quite  too  bad  that 
certain  classes  of  biblical  students  have  thought 
that  they  honored  the  Bible  by  making  it  as  diffi- 
cult as  possible  of  belief.  Thank  God,  wiser 
methods  of  investigation  and  interpretation  now 
prevail.  We  can  still  believe  in  God  and  in  the 
Bible  without  taking  farewell  of  sound  reason, 
clear  judgment,  and  common  sense. 

The  Bible  Narrative. 

Does  the  Bible  teach  that  the  flood  was  univer- 
sal? That  is  the  chief,  really  the  only,  question. 
If  it  does  I  accept  its  statements,  even  though  to 
me  they  are  inexplicable.  But  the  Bible  does  not 
so  affirm.  Fairly  interpreted,  it  makes  no  such 
statement.  Explaining  Scripture  by  Scripture,  we 
shall  see  that  its  strongest  expressions  are  capable 
of  being  interpreted  in  harmony  with,  the  idea  of 
a  local  flood.  True,  it  speaks  of  the  destruction 
of  "  all  flesh"  and  of  "  all  in  whose  nostrils  was  the 
breath  of  life"  ;  but  how  did  the  writer  understand 
such  language?  Was  he  referring  to  North  or 
South  America,  to  Australia,  to  China,  to  Japan? 
Did  he  not  mean  all  in  his  own  locality?  Did  he 
not  mean  all  the  world  which  he  knew?  How 
could  he  have  meant  anything  else?  Was  he  not 
using  such  language  as  is  used  constantly  in  the 
Bible,  when  clearly  only  a  limited  locality  is  in- 


irAS    T//E   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR  LOCAL?     135 

tended  ?  Let  the  Bible  interpret  the  Bible.  Let 
us  read  it  when  it  says,  ''All  countries  came  into 
Egypt  to  buy  corn."  What  countries,  America, 
Europe,  Australia?  Clearly  the  countries  with 
which  the  writer  was  familiar.  Hear  another 
passage,  this  time  from  the  New  Testament:  "A 
decree  went  out  from  Caesar  Augustus  that  all  the 
luorld  should  be  taxed."  What  world?  Are  we 
to  take  such  passages  in  an  absolutely  literal  sense? 
Such  an  interpretation  would  be  nonsense.  It 
was  all  the  world  with  which  those  concerned 
were  familiar.  The  words  of  Obadiah  in  i  Kings 
xviii.  lo,  "There  is  no  nation  or  kingdom  whither 
my  lord  hath  not  sent  to  seek  thee,"  no  one  ever 
dreams  of  interpreting  literally.  One  of  the 
strongest  expressions  in  the  narrative  of  the  del- 
uge is,  "  All  the  high  hills  which  were  under  the 
whole  heaven."  But  this  is  no  stronger  than  an- 
other Scripture  which  says,  "  This  day  will  I  begin 
to  put  the  dread  of  thee  and  the  fear  of  thee  upon 
the  nations  that  arc  tuidcr  the  whole  heaven.'' 
Even  the  terms  of  the  blessing  promised  Noah 
after  the  flood,  though  it  regards  Noah  as  the 
head  of  a  new  human  family  and  the  representa- 
tive of  a  new  race,  can  all  be  interpreted  by  sup- 
posing that  the  flood,  in  the  mind  of  the  writer, 
was  universal  only  in  the  sense  that  it-  extended 
to  the  whole  world  as  then  known. 

There  is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  the  ark 
rested  on  one  of  the  peaks  now  called  Ararat ;  for 
Ararat   was  a  country,  and  not   simply  a  moun- 


136  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

tain ;  and  a  range  like  that  of  the  Zagros  would 
answer  all  the  purposes  of  the  narrative.  The 
local  tradition,  which  finds  parts  of  the  ark  on  the 
top  of  the  mountain,  is,  of  course,  of  no  authority 
w^hatever. 

Some  great  and  sudden  subsidence  of  the  land 
accompanied  by  an  in-rush  of  the  ^vaters  of  the 
Persian  Gulf,  or  some  other  body  of  water,  to- 
gether with  the  rain  for  one  hundred  and  ninety 
days,  would  comply  with  all  the  conditions  of  the 
breaking  up  of  the  great  deep  and  the  opening  of 
the  windows  of  heaven.  In  the  year  1819  a  severe 
earthquake  shock  caused  a  great  depression  in  a 
part  of  the  salt  marsh  called  the  "  Runn  of 
Kutch,"  in  India,  and  many  lives  were  lost  and  a 
vast  inland  sea  was  soon  formed.  No  reference 
in  the  sacred  narrative  is  made  to  any  land,  or  to 
any  world,  except  that  portion  of  the  earth's  sur- 
face known  to  the  writer.  That  territory,  and  an 
unknown  margin  adjoining  it,  were  covered  with 
water.  The  Scripture  says  nothing  of  distant 
portions  of  Asia,  Europe,  America,  Africa,  or 
Australia;  and  when  the  Scripture  is  silent  we 
ought  not  to  speak.  We  ought  not  to  be  wise 
above  that  which  is  written.  The  writer  speaks 
constantly  as  an  eye-witness ;  and  within  his  hor- 
izon all  the  hills  were  covered. 

We  are  at  this  time  removed  from  Adam  by  ten 
generations,  including  Noah's.  A  careful  esti- 
mate of  population  would  give  us  from  three  to 
four  millions  in  the  time  of  Noah ;  and  every  in- 


IVAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR   LOCAL?     137 

dication  suggests  that  the  population  was  eonfmed 
to  a  limited  territory.  IJr.  Murphy  expresses  the 
opinion  that  an  area  equal  to  that  of  the  British 
Isles  would  be  amply  sufficient  for  the  entire 
population  of  men,  women,  and  children.  It  is 
easy  to  locate  a  territory  of  this  size  where  the 
subsidence  would  be  a  comparatively  easy  matter, 
even  as  judged  by  recent  inundations  in  different 
parts  of  the  earth.  The  earth  which  was  sub- 
merged is  the  earth  which  was  corrupt  before  God ; 
it  was  the  earth  which  was  filled  with  violence. 
It  was  this  earth,  and  not  any  other,  which  was 
destroyed  by  the  flood.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  a 
people  of  four  millions  could  be  living  in  the  great 
basin  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris,  and  how  an 
area  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Indian  Ocean,  the  Per- 
sian Gulf,  the  Caspian,  the  Black,  the  Mediterra- 
nean, and  the  Red  seas  could  readily  be  sub- 
merged, in  full  harmony  with  the  teaching  of  the 
Scriptures,  while  the  rest  of  the  universe  would 
not  be  affected.  It  must  ever  be  borne  in  mind 
that  the  description  is  by  a  man  and  from  his 
point  of  view,  and  not  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  all-seeing  God.  It  is  absolutely  certain  that 
the  Bible  does  not  affirm  that  the  whole  globe  was 
covered  with  water.  If  the  Bible  did  so  affirm,  I 
should  believe  it  without  any  hesitancy  whatever ; 
but  we  have  no  right  to  read  into  God's  word  our 
unwarranted  thought;  we  ought  to  get  out  of 
God's  word  simply  His  authoritative  teaching. 


138  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Additional  Difficulties. 

The  astronomical  difficulties:  in  the  way  of  a 
universal  flood  are  insuperable.  If  the  flood  were 
universal,  the  water  must  have  risen  several  miles 
above  the  sea-level.  Such  an  increase  of  water 
would  have  affected  the  equatorial  diameter  of  the 
earth  and  its  orbit  around  the  sun,  and  would 
have  increased  the  sun's  attraction  on  the  planets; 
and  thus  disorder  would  have  been  produced 
throughout  the  remotest  regions  of  space.  After 
the  waters  had  been  assuaged  enormous  changes 
would  have  been  necessary  agaia  in  order  that  the 
former  relations  of  the  heavenly  bodies  might  be 
reestablished.  God  would  have  had  practically 
to  create  the  world  anew.  Can  we  conceive  that 
this  enormous  series  of  miracles  could  have  oc- 
curred simply  for  the  punishment  of  a  compara- 
tively small  number  of  people  inhabiting  a  limited 
portion  of  the  earth's  surface?  God  does  not 
waste  power  in  this  way.  The  geological  objec- 
tions are  scarcely  less  great  than  the  astronomical. 
The  zoological  difficulty,  as  we  have  already  sug- 
gested, is  perhaps  greater  than  either  the  geo- 
logical or  the  astronomical.  Had  there  been  a 
general  deluge,  apart  from  continuous  miracles, 
there  would  have  been  a  general  destruction  of 
marine  life.  The  changing  depths  of  water  would 
have  destroyed  the  coral  reefs  of  the  Pacific.  Yet 
Noah  does  not  seem  to  have  taken  any  kind  of 
marine  animals  into  the  ark.     A  general  deluge 


IFAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR  LOCAL?     139 

would  have  entirely  changed  the  climate  of  the 
whole  world ;  it  would  have  destroyed  all  kinds  of 
fresh-water  fish,  and  such  a  submergence  of  the 
land  in  sea-water  would  have  brought  destruction 
upon  all  terrestrial  plants.  We  have  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  Noah  took  any  stock  of  such  plants 
into  the  ark.  It  was  once  supposed — and  the  old 
books  may  yet  so  affirm — that  geological  discover- 
ies confirmed  the  opinion  that  the  deluge  was  uni- 
versal. The  existence  of  shells  and  corals  upon 
the  high  mountains  was  supposed  to  be  evidence 
of  the  universality  of  the  deluge.  Voltaire  once 
found  it  difficult  to  answer  the  arguments  of  those 
who  cited  the  existence  of  fossil  shells  on  hisfh 
mountains,  and  his  arguments  to  explain  away 
these  supposed  evidences  are  as  childish  as  the 
evidences  themselves  were  imaginary.  Greater 
knowledge  removes  the  difficulties  inseparable 
from  the  belief  in  a  universal  deluge,  and  enables 
us  readily  to  accept  the  statements  of  God's  word. 
All  these  considerations,  therefore,  lead  us  to  be- 
lieve that  the  flood  w^as  local.  The  moral  purpose 
for  which  it  occurred  is  fully  subserved  by  a 
limited,  rather  than  by  a  general,  deluge.  Ac- 
cepting this  view,  nearly  all  difficulties  vanish. 
With  charming  simplicity,  as  well  as  marvellous 
sublimity,  the  Bible  narrates  the  story.  Its  nar- 
rative is  free  from  the  heart-rending  scenes  which 
the  painters  have  so  often  depicted.  The  two 
ideas  constantly  dwelt  upon  in  the  Bible  are  the 
blotting  out  of  the  sinful  race  in  the  submergence 


I40  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

of  the  polluted  earth,  as  far  as  the  eye  could  see, 
and  the  absolute  safety  of  Noah  and  his  family  in 
the  ark.  The  sending  out  of  the  dove,  and  its 
final  return  with  the  fresh  olive  leaf,  is  one  of  the 
most  charming  of  pictures.  In  Psalm  xxix.  lo, 
the  poet  sings  of  the  majest}^  of  God,  and  gives  a 
sublime  conception  when  he  says,  "Jehovah  sat 
as  king  at  the  flood."  The  prophet  Isaiah  intro- 
duces God  as  referring  to  the  flood  to  emphasize 
the  truth  of  His  promise.  The  New  Testament 
gives  its  full  sanction  to  the  historicity  of  the  nar- 
rative. Our  Lord  clearly  declares  that  the  state 
of  the  world  at  His  second  coming  will  be  like 
what  it  was  in  the  days  of  Noah.  The  Apostle 
Peter  draws  from  the  flood  lessons  as  to  the  long- 
suffering  of  God  and  the  separation  of  the  church 
from  the  world.  He  also  makes  it  an  instance  of 
the  righteous  judgment  of  God,  who  spared  not 
the  old  world  when  it  was  corrupted  by  sin.  Most 
beautiful  is  the  closing  scene  after  the  judgment 
had  been  inflicted.  Noah  then  built  his  altar,  the 
first  altar  of  which  we  read  in  the  Bible,  and  then 
Jehovah  smelled  an  "  odor  of  satisfaction"  and 
promised  that  never  again  would  he,  for  man's 
sake,  curse  the  ground  nor  smite  any  living  thing. 
Then  the  rainbow  received  its  new  meaning,  and 
the  special  promises  were  given  regarding  seed- 
time and  harvest,  cold  and  heat,  day  and  night. 
This  is  a  peaceful,  beautiful,  and  divine  picture  of 
the  cleansed  earth,  spanned  by  the  rainbow  in  the 
clouds  after  the  fearful  deluge  had  passed. 


PVAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAL    OR   LOCAL?     141 

Traditions  of  the  Deluge. 

The  literatures  of  many  nations  abound  in 
legends  of  the  flood,  and  between  these  and  the 
Bible  narrative  marked  resemblances  are  found. 
In  various  forms  these  traditions  describe  the  pre- 
servation of  one  righteous  man  with  his  family. 
The  Chalda^an  traditions  are  nearest  to  the  He- 
brew records.  The  god  Belus  foretold  a  vast  rain 
flood.  The  structure  of  a  great  ship  is  described ; 
a  raven  is  sent  out,  and  the  ark  itself  is  said  to 
have  been  preserved  on  the  high  mountains. 
There  are  many  other  notices  of  the  flood,  such 
as  those  in  the  Phoenician  mythology  and  in  the 
Phrygian  story  of  King  Annakos.  There  is  also 
a  cycle  of  traditions  in  Eastern  Asia,  such  as  the 
Persian,  Indian,  and  Chinese.  These  traditions, 
though  varying  in  so  many  respects,  all  point  to 
the  truth  of  the  Bible  narrative.  There  is  also 
the  cycle  of  tradition  found  among  the  American 
nations,  such  as  those  of  Mexico,  those  of  the  Ha- 
waiian Islands,  and  those  of  many  Indian  tribes. 
There  are  also  legends  of  the  flood  preserved  by 
the  Fiji  Islanders,  by  the  Scandinavian  Eddas, 
and  also  the  account  in  the  Koran ;  but  the  most 
interesting  of  all  these  myths  are  those  of  the 
Greek  legends.  They  had  two  such  myths — that 
of  Ogyges  and  that  of  Deucalion  and  Pyrrha. 
This  latter  is  the  best  known  of  the  ethnic  tradi- 
tions. It  teaches  us  that  the  world  had  sunk  into 
iniquity,   and  that  mankind  was  doomed   to  de- 


142  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

struction.  The  ocean  and  the  clouds  combined 
to  drown  the  sinful  race.  The  pious  Deucalion, 
with  his  wife  Pyrrha,  floated  in  a  chest,  which 
bore  them  safely  to  the  peaks  of  Parnassus.  He, 
like  Noah,  sent  out  a  dove,  which  returned  the 
first  time,  but  not  the  second.  God  gives  in  all 
these  traditions  confirmation  of  the  truth  of  His 
holy  Word. 

Lessons. 

This  solemn  and  sublime  event  teaches  us  im- 
portant lessons.  We  see  that  God  is  able  to  exe- 
cute judgment  against  the  greatest  sinners. 
Though  sinners  join  hand-in-hand  they  shall  not 
escape  God's  righteous  justice.  Sinning  angels 
cannot  escape.  God  burned  up  the  filthy  Sodom- 
ites and  drowned  the  sinful  antediluvians.  All 
the  resoures  of  nature  are  at  God's  command. 
He  wields  the  thunderbolt;  and  through  heaven's 
open  windows  He  poured  the  flood,  and  the  vol- 
cano and  the  hurricane  are  obedient  to  His  will. 

God  gives  ample  warning  to  sinners  and  abun- 
dant opportunit}^  for  repentance.  For  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  years  Noah  was  a  preacher  of 
righteousness.  His  acts  in  building  the  ark,  as 
well  as  his  words  in  preaching  the  Gospel,  were 
warnings  to  impenitent  sinners.  Doubtless  he 
was  often  the  subject  of  sneers  and  jeers.  The 
people  may  have  considered  him  a  good  old  man, 
but  with  strange  fancies  and  amusing  forebodings. 
They  doubtless  thought  him  lacking  in  sense,  and 


IVAS    THE   FLOOD    UNIVERSAT.    OR   LOCAL?     143 

perhaps  wrong  in  his  head;  but  he  still  kept  on 
preachino-.  God's  infinite  holiness  patiently 
waited.  Wonderful  was  the  long-suffering-  of 
God  in  the  days  of  Noah.  Well  might  the  Apostle 
Peter  dwell  upon  God's  matchless  patience;  but 
the  blow  eventually  fell.  This  terrible  judgment 
manifested  God's  holiness,  even  as  it  was  seen  in 
Eden  or  on  Sinai. 

There  is  safety  for  all  true  believers.  God  said 
to  Noah,  "  Come  thou  and  all  thy  house  into  the 
ark,"  and  then  God  graciously  closed  the  door  and 
Noah  was  safe.  The  world  without  perished. 
God  can  save  all  His  children,  whatever  destruc- 
tion ma}^  befall  others.  Sodom  was  destroyed, 
but  Lot  was  saved.  Jericho  was  destroyed,  but 
Rahab  was  saved.  Without,  to-day,  the  flood  of 
evil  prevails.  Christ  is  the  true  ark  of  safety. 
Come  into  Him,  and  you  shall  outride  the  storms 
of  life,  and  land  at  last  on  the  shining  hills  of 
glory,  in  the  enjoyment  of  a  new  heaven  and  a 
new  earthy  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness. 


IX. 

WHAT  WAS  THE  PURPOSE  OF  THE  TOWER 
OF    BABEL? 


IX. 

WHAT   WAS   THE    PURPOSE   OF   THE 
TOWER   OF    BABEL? 

The  account  of  the  Tower  of  Babel  is  found  in 
the  eleventh  chapter  of  Genesis  and  the  first  nine 
verses.  Reference  is  made  several  times  in  the 
preceding  chapter  to  the  division  of  the  race  into 
various  settlements ;  the  narrative  now  before  us 
explains  the  divisions  of  the  race  and  the  diver- 
sities of  the  languages  there  assumed.  This 
division  and  diversity  resulted  from  the  project  of 
building  the  temple  and  tower  of  Babel,  and  of 
God's  displeasure  with  the  purpose  of  the  people. 
In  harmony  with  the  method  often  employed  by 
inspired  writers,  the  dispersion  of  the  people  is 
first  mentioned,  and  then  the  cause  of  that  dis- 
persion is  fully  described. 

It  is  quite  certain  that  the  early  fathers  of  the 
human  family,  after  the  deluge,  wandered  about 
for  some  time  without  any  fixed  place  of  abode ; 
but  it  was  also  quite  certain  that  they  could  not 
always  live  a  nomadic  life.  Gregariousness  is  an 
inseparable  instinct  of  humanity;  this  tendency 
of  human  nature  is  shown  to-day  in  the  desire  for 
city  life.  It  thus  comes  to  pass  that  the  popula- 
tion of  our  great   cities  is  increasing  at  the  ex- 


14S  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

pense  of  rural  populations.  This  tendency  is  seen 
in  all  the  countries  of  the  globe.  British  and 
continental  cities  are  growing  almost  as  rapidly 
as  are  the  most  enterprising  cities  in  America. 
In  harmony  with  this  ancient  and  universal  in- 
stinct the  descendants  of  Noah  finally  made  a  per- 
manent residence  in  the  land  of  Shinar.  Shinar 
was  the  ancient  name  of  Babylonia  or  Chaldaea, 
as  the  tract  of  land  in  later  times  came  to  be 
known.  This  Avas  a  great  alluvial  district 
through  which  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  flowed 
before  reaching  the  sea.  This  country  was 
marked  by  the  absence  of  stone  for  building  ma- 
terial, but  it  was  famous  for  the  excellence  of  the 
bricks  there  made,  and  for  the  slime  that  was 
used  for  mortar.  It  was  known  also  for  its  textile 
fabrics;  the  "goodly  Babylonish  garment"  of 
Joshua  vii.  21,  which  proved  a  snare  to  Achan,  was 
a  "  garment  of  Shinar. "  This  country  is  probably 
to  be  identified  with  the  Sumer  or  the  Shumer  of 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions,  and  so  a  name  denot- 
ing the  southern  portion  of  the  "  land  of  the  Chal- 
daeans. "  The  name  usually  includes  the  whole 
rich  and  populous  alluvial  plain  to  which  refer- 
ence has  been  made,  reaching  from  the  Persian 
Gulf  to  a  point  north  of  the  modern  Bagdad,  a 
little  more  than  two  hundred  miles. 


F  UK  POSE    OF    THE    TOWER    OF  BABEL.     149 


*'One  Lip." 

Up  to  the  time  mentioned  in  the  Scripture 
under  consideration  the  people  had  remained  to- 
gether, speaking  one  language.  We  are  told  that 
they  were,  to  render  the  words  literally,  "  of  one 
lip  and  of  words  one"  ;  that  is,  they  employed  one 
kind  or  stock  of  words.  They  also  developed  one 
kind  of  civilization.  As  the  lip  is  the  principal 
organ  in  the  utterance  of  words,  the  word  sap  ha  h^ 
lip,  is  here  employed,  although  a  frequent  Scrip- 
ture term  for  language  is  Icshon^  tongue.  The 
confusion  of  the  lip  is  probably  a  change  in  the 
pronunciation  of  words,  and  this  change  will  ac- 
count for  the  babel,  or  confusion,  which  took 
place  at  this  time.  The  people  finding  a  home  in 
the  rich  plain  of  Shinar,  the  derivation  suggesting 
its  name  as  the  land  of  "  the  two  rivers,"  they  de- 
termined to  build  a  city  and  tower  of  great  height. 
All  ancient  authorities  and  modern  travellers 
affirm  that  building  material  was  easy  to  find  in 
this  valley.  The  people,  therefore,  proceeded  to 
burn  bricks,  "  burning  them  to  a  burning,"  that  is, 
burning  them  thoroughl}^,  and  to  use  slime  or 
bitumen  for  mortar.  Bricks  were  often  dried 
simply  by  the  sun,  but  these  heroic  builders 
wished  to  secure  the  most  durable  material,  and 
so  they  thoroughly  burned  the  bricks.  The 
Scripture  narrative  teaches  us  that  God  interposed 
and  frustrated  all  their  plans,  and  this  interposi- 


150  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

tion  was  brought  about  by  the  introduction  of 
hopeless  confusion  into  their  lanugage.  They 
were  thus  unable  longer  to  understand  one  an- 
other. They  therefore  "left  off  to  build  the  city," 
and  soon  were  scattered  abroad  on  the  face  of  the 
earth.  This  remarkable  circumstance  gave  rise 
to  the  word  babel,  perhaps  meaning  confusion. 
This  name  the  Greeks  corrupted  into  Babylon, 
and  although  originally  applied  only  to  the  Tower 
of  Babel,  it  was  afterward  extended  to  the  city  of 
Babylon,  which  grew  up  about  the  tower;  and 
finally  it  was  extended  to  the  whole  province  of 
Babylonia.  We  thus  see  that  God  did  not  intend 
that  men  should  always  remain  in  a  limited  local- 
ity and  should  speak  only  one  language.  Per- 
haps the  account  here  given  will  not  explain  fully 
the  origin  of  languages ;  but  it  is  at  least  sugges- 
tive of  elements  which  entered  into  that  origin, 
and  into  the  conceptions  of  the  times  of  the 
writer  regarding  the  diversity  of  speech.  Some 
would  derive  the  word  Babel  from  Bab-ihi,  mean- 
ing "the  gate  of  the  god."  This  is  in  substance 
the  story  as  found  on  the  inspired  page.  It  is 
narrated  in  a  dramatic  manner  and  with  rare 
poetic  beauty. 

Ethnic  Traditions. 

The  Chaldaean  traditions  state  that  the  first 
men  became  proud  of  their  great  strength  and 
raised  a  tower  reaching  toward  heaven  in  the 
place   where    Babylon   afterward    stood.      They 


PURPOSE    OF    THE    TOWER    OF  BABEL.      151 

state  also  that  the  gods,  assisted  by  fierce  winds, 
hurled  the  building  down  upon  the  heads  of  the 
builders,  and  that  out  of  the  material  thus  col- 
lected the  city  of  Babylon  was  built.  These  tra- 
ditions harmonize  with  the  Bible  narrative  in  say- 
ing that  before  this  event  all  the  people  spoke 
one  language,  but  after  it  they  differed  widely  in 
their  tongues.  Greek  traditions  are  in  substantial 
harmony  with  those  of  Chaldaea.  Plato  makes 
the  uniformity  extend  to  animals  as  well  as  to 
men  in  the  golden  age.  Perhaps  the  advance  of 
linguistic  science  will  yet  enable  us  to  understand 
the  language  of  animals,  as  these  traditions  affirm 
concerning  the  early  period  of  human  history. 
Plato  also  echoes  other  parts  of  the  Bible  story  in 
saying  that  men  in  their  unholy  ambition  aspired 
to  immortality,  and  that  they  were  punished  by 
Jupiter,  who  utterly  confounded  their  language. 
Attention  has  also  been  called  to  the  fact  that  in 
the  account  of  the  wars  of  the  Titans  against  the 
gods,  we  clearly  see  traces  of  the  traditionary  re- 
semblances to  the  narrative  in  the  Bible  concern- 
ing Babel.  Other  traditions  associate  these  events 
with  Nimrod,  a  "bold,  bad  man,"  who  strove  to 
alienate  the  minds  of  the  people  from  God,  and  to 
build  a  tower  too  high  for  the  waters  ever  to 
reach  its  top.  This  he  did,  the  traditions  affirm, 
in  order  to  take  revenge  for  the  punishment  of 
the  deluge.  But  this  explanation  for  the  cause  of 
the  erection  of  Babel  is  very  unsatisfactory.  We 
know  that  the  people  could  not  have  feared  an- 


152  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

Other  deluge,  for  God  had  given  an  express  prom- 
ise to  the  contrary ;  and  if  another  deluge  should 
come,  they  must  have  known  that  no  tower  they 
could  build  would  protect  them,  as  the  waters 
went  over  the  highest  hills  in  the  parts  sub- 
merged. 

Several  writers  on  this  subject  remind  us  that 
it  was  long  believed  that  the  native  Babylonian 
records  contained  references  to  the  tower  of  Babel 
and  the  confusion  of  speech ;  and,  it  is  stated,  that 
recently  such  a  record  has  been  discovered.  Mr. 
George  Smith  brought  a  number  of  clay  tablets 
from  Babylonia  and  deposited  them  in  the  British 
Museum,  and  among  them  is  one,  unfortunately 
badly  mutilated,  but  still  sufficiently  legible  to 
show  that  it  probably  contained  the  Babylonian 
account  of  this  whole  deeply  interesting  history. 
Herodotus,  in  simple  and  graphic  language,  de- 
scribes the  building  of  the  walls  of  Babylon  in  ex- 
pressions which  remind  us  of  the  Biblical  narra- 
tive of  the  building  of  the  tower  of  Babel.  In 
both  narratives  there  is  a  reference  to  the  excel- 
lent building  materials  which  the  Babylonian  soil 
furnishes  in  such  abundance.  Bitumen  pits  are 
still  fotmd  from  which  bitumen  bubbles  up,  and 
which  can  be  readily  manufactured  into  cement 
for  use  in  buildings  at  the  present  day.  It  is 
known  that  in  some  parts  of  southern  California 
there  is  soil  containing  materials  not  unlike  those 
found  in  the  alluvial  plain  of  Babylon.  The 
tablets  found  in  the  British  Museum  state  that  the 


PURPOSE    OF    THE    TOWER    OF  BABEL.      153 

tower  was  erected  under  the  supervision  of  a  semi- 
divine  being  called  Etanna.  In  Central  America 
there  are  traditions  similar  to  the  story  of  the 
tower  of  Babel.  Xelhua,  one  of  the  seven  giants 
rescued  from  the  deluge,  so  the  tradition  affirms, 
attempted  to  storm  heaven  and  oppose  all  the 
gods,  and  so  he  built  the  great  pyramid  of  Cholula. 
But  in  this  case  also  the  gods  interposed,  destroyed 
the  tower  with  fire,  and  utterly  confounded  the 
language  of  the  builders.  In  northern  India 
traces  of  similar  legends  are  found;  and  even 
among  certain  African  tribes  Dr.  Livingstone  met 
with  traditions  possessing  features  similar  to  the 
narrative  in  the  Bible.  There  are  also  Australian 
legends  regarding  the  origin  of  the  diversity  of 
speech  kindred  to  those  already  named.  All 
these  traditions  point  to  an  original  historic  inci- 
dent ;  they  tend  to  confirm  our  faith  in  the  Bible 
narrative.  They  are  all  eloquent  as  to  the  orig- 
inal unity  of  the  race  and  the  reality  of  the  divine 
purpose  in  its  dispersion. 

Reasons  for  Building  the  Tower. 

It  is  clearly  shown  in  the  sacred  narrative  that 
the  design  of  the  builders  was  threefold.  They 
wished  to  make  a  name ;  this  is  distinctly  stated 
in  Genesis  xi.  4.  A  tower  is  simply  another  name 
for  a  citadel,  or  place  of  defence.  This  reason 
for  the  building  of  the  tower  sets  aside  a  great 
many  foolish  conjectures  as  to  its  design.     The 


154  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

primary  object  was  to  transmit  an  illustrious 
name  for  grand  designs  and  heroic  enterprises. 
The  project  had  reference  to  some  warlike  move- 
ments which  would  enable  the  people  to  defend 
themselves  against  insurrections,  and  probably  to 
enforce  an  unholy  despotism.  Nimrod  was  prob- 
ably the  leader,  and  he  was  one  of  the  first  who  is 
recorded  to  have  attempted  the  exercise  of  des- 
potic power  over  his  fellow-men.  A  second 
reason  was  an  ambition  to  erect  a  structure  which 
in  itself  should  challenge  attention  and  evoke 
admiration.  A  third  reason  is  that  the  people 
might  not  be  scattered  abroad.  The  Bible  gives 
no  intimation  whatever  that  the  tower  was  built 
for  the  purpose  of  escaping  another  flood.  The 
great  height  of  the  tower  would  make  it  a  rallying 
point  in  the  level  plains  where  it  was  located.  In 
these  wide  and  level  plains  this  was  an  object  of 
great  practical  importance,  as  there  are  few  ob- 
jects to  guide  the  traveller  in  his  journeys,  the 
plains  being  virtually  a  vast  sea  of  land.  In  the 
simple  fact  that  the  people  did  not  wish  to  be 
scattered  abroad  they  were  opposing  God's  pur- 
pose as  several  times  declared.  It  is  quite  cer- 
tain that  some  unworthy  motives  and  ungodly 
ambitions  were  blended  with  the  desire  of  the 
people  to  remain  together.  There  is  much  in  this 
desire  which  elicits  our  commendation,  but  we 
must  see  that  the  conduct  of  the  people  evinced 
pride,  arrogance,  and  disobedience  against  God. 
They  w^ere  forcing  a  conspiracy  to  establish  a  uni- 


PURPOSE   OF    THE    TOWER    OF  BABEL.      155 

versal  temporal  monarchy.  God  intended  that 
the  people  should  spread  themselves  abroad,  and 
they  attempted  to  defeat  the  purpose  of  God  in 
this  regard.  They  resolved  to  establish  a  civiliza- 
tion of  their  own ;  they  planned  to  build  society, 
not  upon  faith  in  an  unseen  God,  but  on  lofty 
brick  walls  and  sky-kissing  towers.  Thy  were 
believers  in  a  merely  material  civilization.  Their 
work  was  an  offspring  of  an  unholy  ambition. 
Philo  narrates  a  tradition  that  each  man  wrote 
his  name  on  a  brick  which  was  to  be  placed  in  the 
structure.  The  same  tendency  is  seen  to-day. 
Men  strive  to  shut  out  God  from  personal,  family, 
and  national  life.  They  talk  simply  of  law,  of 
culture,  and  of  civilization,  ignoring  God  and 
spiritual  and  eternal  things.  God  will  in  some 
form  confound  their  plans  as  surely  as  He  did 
those  of  the  builders  on  the  plains  of  Shinar.  God 
can  overrule  and  frustrate  the  ambitious  dreams 
of  the  Nimrods,  the  Nebuchadnezzars,  the  Alex- 
anders, the  Caesars,  and  the  Napoleons  of  all  cen- 
turies, countries,  and  civilizations. 

The  Original  Language. 

We  do  not  know  what  the  original  language 
was  which  was  confounded  at  Babel.  For  a  long 
time  it  was  claimed  that  it  was  the  Hebrew,  but 
that  idea  has  now  been  largely  abandoned. 
Learned  men  have  not  yet  reached  any  satisfac- 
tory  conclusion   regarding   the  original  tongue. 


156  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Some  suppose  that  it  is  entirely  lost.  It  may 
have  been  the  Hebrew  or  the  Aramaic.  We  know 
that  the  Aramaic  was  long  dominant  in  the  valley 
of  the  Euphrates,  and  that  it  is  closely  allied  to 
the  Hebrew;  these  two  facts  make  a  strong  plea 
in  favor  of  the  Aramaic,  or  Chaldee,  as  the  very 
language  of  Noah,  or  at  least  as  belonging  to  the 
same  family  of  languages  as  that  which  he  spoke. 
Enthusiastic  Highland  Scotchmen  are  firmly  con- 
vinced that  the  language  of  Adam  and  Noah  was 
none  other  than  the  Gaelic,  and  some  of  the  argu- 
ments which  they  use  in  the  attempt  to  establish 
this  point  are,  to  say  the  least,  most  suggestive 
and  striking.  This,  however,  is  a  point  regarding 
which  scholarship  has  not  yet  reached  any  defi- 
nite conclusion.  The  science  of  comparative  phi- 
lology has  in  recent  years  made  tremendous  prog- 
ress. It  has  enabled  us  to  determine  the  relations 
between  the  Saxon  and  the  Norman,  and  between 
the  conquering  Aryans  in  India  and  the  many 
conquered  tribes  in  that  great  peninsula,  and  it 
may  yet  enable  us  to  determine  with  some  degree 
of  certainty  the  language  which  was  spoken  before 
the  confusion  of  tongues  and  the  dispersion  of  the 
peoples  occurred.  God  will  eventually  use  the 
scholarship  of  the  world  for  the  glory  of  the  Bible, 
the  salvation  of  men,  and  the  honor  of  Jesus 
Christ. 


PURPOSE    OF   THE    TOWER   OF  BABEL.      157 


The  Modern    Representative  of  Babel. 

This  historic  tower  is  mentioned  only  once  in 
Scripture,  in  the  passage  now  under  review.  Was 
it  ever  completed?  All  the  indications  confirm 
us  in  believing  that  it  was  not ;  perhaps  it  never 
advanced  much  beyond  its  foundations.  The 
Jewish  tradition  is  that  fire  fell  from  Heaven  and 
split  the  tower  into  fragments.  It  is  believed, 
however,  that  the  "  Tower  of  Belus"  occupies  the 
site  of  the  original  tower  of  Babel.  Classical 
writers,  in  describing  Babylon,  uniformly  refer  to 
a  tower-like  building  which  they  call  "  The  Tem- 
ple or  Tomb  of  Belus."  This  structure  is  de- 
scribed by  Herodotus,  and  is  probably  represent- 
ed by  the  modern  "  Birs-Nimrud  ";  some  writers 
in  this  connection  speak  of  what  was  called  "  The 
Temple  of  the  Seven  Lights  of  the  Earth,"  dedi- 
cated to  Nebo  at  Borsippa,  a  suburb  of  Babylon. 
This  structure  was  completed  in  the  reign  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar. When  he  conquered  Jerusalem  he 
put  its  captured  treasures  in  the  temple  of  Bel  at 
Babylon.  When  the  Jews  were  carried  captive 
into  Babylonia  they  saw  in  many  of  the  great 
buildings  reminders  of  the  tower  mentioned  in 
their  Scriptures.  Christian  travellers  were  accus- 
tomed to  call  any  great  mass  of  ruins  "  The  Tower 
of  Babel. "  There  was  long  a  consensus  of  opin- 
ion among  the  learned  that  Birs-Nimrud,  or  Tow- 
er of  Nimrod,  was  the  tower  of  Babel ;  and  it  is 


158  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

now  pretty  generally  agreed  that  it  at  least  is  a 
good  representative  of  an  ancient  Babylonian 
temple-tower.  Dr.  William  Hayes  Ward,  of  New 
York,  as  the  head  of  the  Wolfe  expedition,  had 
it  photographed  by  Mr.  J.  H.  Haynes,  and  Dr. 
Ward  has  fully  described  this  historic  ruin.  He 
is  disposed  to  regard  the  story  in  Genesis  as  an 
interesting  illustration  of  folklore;  but  his  de- 
scription and  illustrations  tend  to  confirm  the 
truth  of  the  story.  The  building  is  an  oblique 
pyramid.  Its  first  basement  stage  is  an  exact 
square  272  feet  each  way,  26  feet  high;  the  second 
is  230  feet  each  way,  and  the  third  188  feet.  It 
thus  decreases  in  width  as  it  increases  in  height. 
It  has  been  recently  conjectured  that  the  upper 
portions  of  this  tower  were  used  as  an  observa- 
tory for  astronomical  observations.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  Babylonians  were  earnest  stu- 
dents of  astronomy,  and  the  elevation  of  this 
tower,  the  clear  atmosphere,  and  the  broad  plains 
were  all  conducive  to  the  careful  study  of  this  en- 
nobling science.  It  has  also  been  suggested  that 
the  upper  portions  of  this  tower  were  used  by  the 
priests  as  sleeping-places  in  the  summer-time,  as 
they  gave  greater  coolness  and  greater  freedom 
from  insects  than  the  lower  stories  furnished. 
All  travellers  agree  that  this  mass  of  ruins  is 
deeply  impressive  as  it  rises  out  of  the  desert 
plain.  Parts  of  it  show  the  effect  of  great  heat, 
as  they  are  vitrified.  It  is  a  fire-blasted  pile  and 
is  rent  and  fragmentary.     Its  dreary  aspect  has 


PURPOSE   OF    THE    TOWER   OF  BABEL.      159 

led  to  its  being  called  ''  Nebuchadnezzar's  Prison. " 
The  entire  neighborhood  indicates  that  here 
there  was  some  signal  overthrow  in  former  times. 
Perhaps  the  vitrification  is  a  justification  of  the 
tradition  that  the  tower  was  blasted  by  the  light- 
nings of  Heaven.  The  pyramidal  temples  of  other 
countries  make  belief  in  this  great  tower  of  Belus 
less  difficult.  All  who  have  visited  Tanjore,  in 
India,  are  familiar  with  a  tower  which  will  at 
least  suggest  that  of  Babel — the  Tower  at  Tan- 
jore. It  is  built  entirely  of  stone,  and  on  its  top 
is  a  chapel  or  temple  whose  design  is  in  harmony 
with  that  of  other  sacred  structures  in  India. 
The  gate  of  these  pagodas  always  fronts  the 
eavSt;  they  are  generally  on  the  banks  of  great 
rivers,  and  are  usually  surrounded  by  courts. 
The  great  Mexican  pyramid  is  not  much  unlike 
that  of  Tanjore.  These  pyramids  show  the  ten- 
dency of  former  days  in  different  parts  of  the 
world  and  among  various  peoples. 

God's  Purpose  in  the  Dispersion  of  Races. 

It  was  the  purpose  of  God  that  the  three  primi- 
tive families  should  migrate.  From  the  central 
regions,  where  they  developed  their  first  civiliza- 
tions, they  went  out  by  successive  colonizations, 
and  soon  they  established  distant  communities. 
Marvellously  interesting  is  it  to  trace  God's  hand 
in  the  boundaries  and  characteristics  of  various 
nations.     The  Hamitic,  the  Semitic,  and  the  Ja- 


l6o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

phetic  had  each  its  work  to  do,  and  its  triumphs 
to  achieve.  The  sons  of  Japheth  were  men  of 
resistless  will  and  tireless  muscle.  Westward  and 
northward  they  pushed,  and  finally  they  became 
the  authors  of  Greek  literature,  of  Roman  gov- 
ernment, of  modern  Europe,  and  of  marvellous 
America.  This  commingling  of  races  is  God's 
plan  for  saving  man  physically.  No  unmixed 
race  can  long  hold  its  own.  The  native  Hawai- 
ians  must  speedily  die  or  unite  with  seme  other 
races.  The  modern  Frenchman  has  in  his  veins 
the  blood  of  the  Celt,  the  Frank,  and  the  Nor- 
man, and  he  is  better  than  either  one  alone. 
In  the  veins  of  the  modern  Briton  are  the  com- 
mingling streams  of  the  blood  of  many  nations ; 
and  the  modern  Briton  is  marching  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth,  carrying  with  him  law,  liberty,  civil- 
ization, and  Christianity.  The  American  of  the 
future  will  be  an  amalgam  of  many  nations ;  and 
he  ought  to  be  the  noblest  product  of  civilization 
and  Christianity  which  the  world  has  3^et  seen. 
America  deserves  the  best  from  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth.  The  worst  nations  of  southern  Europe 
should  no  longer  be  permitted  to  dump  their  ref- 
use populations  on  our  American  shores. 

Lessons. 

There  is  great  danger  that  we  may  still  mani- 
fest the  spirit  of  the  builders  of  Babel.  Men  are 
still  under  the  power  of  unholy  ambitions  and 


PURPOSE   OF    THE    TOWER    OF  BABEL.     l6i 

material  civilizations.  God  should  be  the  guide 
of  every  life.  God  should  be  the  senior  partner 
of  every  business.  It  is  daring-  impiety  which 
leaves  God  out  of  our  plans  for  life. 

The  church  of  Jesus  Christ  had  its  natal  day 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  Pentecost  is  the 
counterpart  of  Babel.  Pentecost  made  it  possible 
for  the  messengers  of  the  cross  to  go  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth  with  the  message  of  the  Gospel  of 
salvation.  Babel  made  men  in  some  sense  aliens ; 
Pentecost  aims  to  make  all  men  brothers.  In  the 
Fatherhood  of  God  we  have  the  true  brotherhood 
of  man.  The  church  calls  us  to  labor  as  builders 
of  the  true  city  of  God.  Its  living  stones  are  ce- 
mented together  by  the  unity  of  the  faith.  The 
city  we  are  building  has  enduring  foundations, 
and  its  top  will  finally  reach  to  Heaven.  In 
Heaven  there  is  one  language,  one  life,  one  love. 
God  hasten  the  blessed  consummation  when  the 
kingdoms  of  this  world  shall  become  the  kingdom 
of  our  Lord  and  His  Christ ! 


WAS   LOT   WISE    IN    PITCHING    HIS  TENT 
TOWARD   SODOM? 


X. 

WAS  LOT  WISE  IN  PITCHING  HIS  TENT 
TOWARD  SODOM? 

In  Genesis,  the  thirteenth  chapter  and  a  part  of 
the  twelfth  verse,  we  read  concerning  Lot  that 
he  "  pitched  his  tent  toward  Sodom.  "  Did  he  act 
wisely  in  so  doing?  The  story  suggested  by  these 
words  is  full  of  interest  and  instruction.  It  opens 
with  associative  glimpses  into  family  life  of  the 
ancient  time. 

We  here  see  how  in  private  life  there  are  op- 
portunities of  displaying  a  rare  heroism  and  a  fine 
chivalry.  We  shall  observe- in  stud3dng  this  nar- 
rative that  common  events  may  reveal  selfishness 
or  generosit)^  of  character,  and  may  be  made  an 
occasion  for  developing  the  noblest  qualities  of 
manhood  and  the  broadest  principles  of  godliness. 
This  ancient  story  shows  us  how  true  religion 
beautifies  and  glorifies  domestic  life,  and  how  the 
lowliest  duties  may  manifest  the  loftiest  qualities 
in  human  action. 

Lot's  Name  and  Family. 

His  name  means  a  covering  or  a  veil.  He  was 
the  son  of  Haran,  and  so  the  nephew  of  Abram. 
His  grandfather  was  Terah.     About  two  thousand 


i66  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

years  before  Christ  he  removed  with  his  grand- 
father to  Haran  in  Mesopotamia.  There  Terah 
died  aged  two  hundred  and  five  years.  About  a 
year  later,  in  company  with  Abraham,  Lot  came 
into  the  land  of  Canaan.  In  consequence  of  a 
famine,  he  went  with  Abram  and  Sarai  into 
Egypt;  soon  after  he  returned  to  the  southern 
part  of  Canaan,  and  then  went  to  the  region  of 
Bethel  and  Ai,  where  Abram  built  his  first  altar 
and  called  upon  the  name  of  Jehovah.  We  shall 
get  a  true  conception  of  Lot's  character  and  his- 
tory by  a  series  of  pictures  representing  both,  at 
which  we  may  now  look. 

First  Picture. 

We  have  before  us  Lot  making  a  selfish  choice 
of  the  best  pastures.  ■  This  is  a  most  instructive 
picture.  In  the  background  are  seen  the  herds- 
men of  Lot  engaged  in  strife  with  the  herdsmen 
of  Abram.  Still  farther  in  the  background  are 
seen  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite  who  still 
dwelled  in  the  land ;  and  in  the  foreground  are 
seen  the  noble  Abram  and  the  selfish  Lot.  The 
presence  of  the  heathen  in  the  land  ought  to  have 
warned  the  herdsmen  of  the  danger  of  their  family 
quarrels.  But  the  spirit  of  rivalry  and  jealousy 
broke  forth,  notwithstanding  the  danger  to  which 
it  subjected  both  Abram  and  Lot.  They  went 
down  into  Egypt  poor,  and  they  now  return  rich. 
The  Hebrew  words  translated  "  very  rich"  literal- 


IVAS  LOT    WISE?  167 

ly  mean  cxcccdiiigly  heavy.  The  term  rich  is,  of 
course,  a  relative  one,  and  judged  by  British  or 
American  standards  a  wealthy  Arab  sheik  would 
be  considered  poor.  The  wealth  of  these  emirs 
consisted  mostly  in  flocks  of  sheep  and  goats,  and 
in  camels.  Their  increased  flocks  made  herbage  in 
the  vicinity  of  Bethel  too  scanty  for  their  accom- 
modation. Behold  the  two  men  standing  on  one 
of  the  round  swelling  hills  near  Bethel !  So  far 
as  we  can  discover,  there  is  no  strife  between 
them ;  it  is  limited  to  their  herdsmen.  But  Abram 
was  sagacious  enough  to  foresee  that  these  jar- 
ring jealousies  would  increase  more  and  more, 
and  might  Anally  cause  an  estrangement  between 
him  and  his  nephew.  These  two  men  stand  look- 
ing out  over  the  empty  land  in  the  direction  of 
Sodom.  The  land  before  them  is  beautiful  to  the 
eye ;  it  is  well  watered — literally  it  was  "  all  a- wa- 
tering " — showing  the  fertilizing  effect  which 
irrigation  by  various  streams  produced. 

The  language  of  the  Scripture  at  this  point  is 
very  striking.  The  land  is  as  beautiful  as  the 
wonderfully  green  Egypt  which  they  had  just 
left,  and  beautiful  even  as  the  garden  of  Jeho- 
vah, whose  superhuman  charms  still  lingered  in 
the  thought  of  the  time.  Abram  gave  Lot  his 
choice.  Through  the  clear  air  of  Palestine  the 
distant  valley  could  clearly  be  seen.  It  has 
been  well  remarked  that  we  are  here  reminded 
of  the  choice  of  Hercules,  as  described  in  Gre- 
cian   legend,    and   of   the    turning   back   of   the 


l68  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

prophet  from  Damascus  as  represented  in  the 
fables  of  Islam.  Abram  here  treats  Lot  as  if 
they  were  really  brethren,  instead  of  uncle  and 
nephew.  The  prospect  was  fascinating  in  the 
extreme,  and  Lot  could  not  resist  its  attractions. 
He  chose  all  the  plain  of  Jordan ;  he  journeyed 
east,  he  pitched  his  tent  toward  Sodom,  and  he 
separated  from  his  noble  uncle.  The  conduct  of 
Abram  was  eminently  considerate ;  it  was  gener- 
ous almost  to  a  fault.  Not  only  was  he  the  se- 
nior and  superior  of  the  two,  but  he  was  especially 
called  of  God  to  lordship  in  the  land.  The  con- 
duct of  Lot  was  selfish  and  covetous  to  a  remark- 
able degree.  His  finer  feelings  were  deadened, 
and  he  assumed  enormous  risk  in  going  toward 
Sodom,  because  of  its  well-known  character  for 
the  practice  of  abominable  evils. 

This  picture  makes  a  powerful  appeal  to  the 
imagination.  We  shall  later  see  that  Lot  paid  an 
enormous  price  for  his  rich  pastures.  We  ought 
always  to  remember,  when  we  yield  to  the  gratifi- 
cation of  the  moment,  that  there  is  a  to-mor- 
row with  which  we  must  reckon.  The  people  of 
Sodom  were  not  only  wicked,  but  desperately 
wicked;  they  were  high-handed  and  heaven-dar- 
ing sinners.  Yet  Lot  chose  their  neighborhood 
for  the  sake  of  its  temporal  advantage.  It  may 
be  that  the  word  translated  toivard  means  at^  or 
in  the  vicinity  of,  Sodom ;  but  it  is  not  quite  in 
Sodom.  Choices  reveal  character.  A  man  is 
really  what  his  choice  declares  his  inner  life  to 


IV AS   LOT    WISE?  169 

be.  The  man  who  prefers  pebbles  to  diamonds 
manifests  insanity.  The  man  who  chooses  a  tem- 
porary earthly  good  and  rejects  eternal  and  spir- 
itual things  is  morally  insane.  So  Lot  chose.  He 
removed  his  tent  from  place  to  place,  but  grad- 
ually he  approaches  Sodom.  Perhaps  he  intended 
to  keep  at  some  distance  from  this  perilous  place ; 
but  still  he  goes  imperceptibly  onward.  He  nears 
this  sink  of  corruption.  He  treads  the  borders 
of  forbidden  ground. 

So  men  trifle  to-da}^  with  evil ;  so  they  parley 
with  tlic  devil.  They  lie  on  the  bank  of  the  nar- 
row stream  dividing  right  from  wrong.  They  do 
not  intend  to  cross  that  stream ;  but  they  love  to 
look  upon  the  blooming  flowers  and  to  breathe 
the  pleasant  odors  of  the  forbidden  land.  Things 
inevitably  follow  their  tendencies.  If  these  men 
do  not  quickly  change  their  course  both  they  and 
Lot  will  be  in  Sodom.  "  Let  him  that  thinketh 
he  standeth  take  heed  lest  he  fall." 

Second  Picture. 

We  next  find  Lot,  together  with  the  inhabitants 
of  Sodom,  made  a  prisoner  by  Chedorlaomer. 
Let  us  quickly  get  the  salient  features  of  this 
picture.  Chedorlaomer  came  from  beyond  the 
Euphrates ;  he  was  king  of  Elam,  in  Persia.  He 
was  the  leader  of  the  several  allied  kings,  who 
invaded  Canaan.  He  had  already  brought  a 
number  of  small  states  under  tribute,  and  among 


lyo  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

these  were  the  five  cities  in  the  region  of  the 
Dead  Sea.  These  states  were  impatient  under 
their  burden  of  tribute,  and  finally  they  withheld 
its  payment.  This  led  to  the  invasion  of  the 
country,  and  to  the  ravaging  visitation  of  the 
whole  country  south  and  east  of  the  Jordan. 
Soon  the  kings  of  the  plains  were  defeated  and 
carried  awa)^  as  slaves,  as  was  the  custom  of  the 
times.  Lot  was  included  in  this  unfortunate  num- 
ber of  slaves.  He  had  cast  in  his  lot  with  these 
people,  and  he  must  share  with  them  in  their  evil 
fortune.  This  is  part  of  the  price  which  he  is 
paying  for  his  good  pastures.  Behold  him  now 
borne  off,  a  slave  in  the  power  of  his  cruel  cap- 
tors! 

Nobly  does  the  character  of  generous  Abram 
appear  in  this  crisis  in  the  life  of  Lot.  Abram 
heard  of  his  misfortune  and  hastened  to  his 
rescue.  The  brave  uncle  immediately  armed 
three  hundred  and  eighteen  of  his  retainers — a 
fact  that  shows  he  was  a  sheik  of  wealth  and 
power — and  joined  by  three  friendly  Amoritish 
chiefs,  he  pursued  the  returning  invaders.  Near 
the  fountains  of  the  Jordan  he  overtook  them  as 
they  fled  in  haste.  Some  of  his  allies  attacked 
the  enemies  by  night  on  the  one  side,  and  some 
on  the  other;  and  soon  they  were  thrown  into 
utter  confusion  and  fled  in  hopeless  dismay.  On, 
on  over  the  hills  went  the  brave  Abram  and  his 
heroic  men  in  hot  pursuit  until  they  reached  the 
neighborhood  of  Damascus,     They  then  returned 


IVAS  LOT    Jr/SE?  171 

victorious,  carrying  back  the  men  and  the  proper- 
ty seized  by  the  invaders.  Doubtless  Lot's  sad 
plight  influenced  Abram  to  undertake  this  ex- 
ploit ;  but  in  delivering  Lot  he  conferred  signal 
benefits  on  many  tribes  and  peoples ;  and,  as  a 
result,  his  courage  and  wisdom  were  greatly 
honored  throughout  the  land.  It  was  while  on 
his  return  from  this  successful  expedition  that 
he  was  met  by  Melchizedek,  king  of  Salem,  and 
priest  of  the  most  high  God. 

Abram  might  have  kept,  according  to  the  usa- 
ges of  war,  then  and  there,  and  in  many  parts  of 
the  Orient  still,  the  recovered  goods;  and  the 
king  of  Sodom,  who  met  the  victors  in  the  val- 
ley near  Salem,  freely  admitted  this  right.  But 
Abram,  with  a  truly  noble  spirit  toward  men  and 
a  loyal  devotion  toward  God,  refused  the  goods, 
saying:  "  I  have  lifted  up  mine  hand  unto  Jeho- 
vah, the  most  high  God,  and  I  will  not  take  from 
a  thread  to  a  sandal-thong,  lest  thou  shouldst 
say,  I  have  made  Abram  rich."  These  are  stir- 
ring words ;  they  thrill  our  hearts  to  this  hour. 
These  heroic  achievements  and  generous  senti- 
ments gave  Abram  much  deserved  celebrity  in 
Canaan.  The  people  owed  their  deliverance  to 
Abram,  and  even  Lot,  for  his  uncle's  sake,  must 
have  received  some  respect  and  gratitude.  But 
the  vSodomites  were  so  besotted,  corrupt,  and 
bestial  as  to  have  few  sentiments  of  gratitude  or 
generosity  above  the  level  of  their  degraded  in- 
stincts and  sensualized  desires. 


172  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

Third  Picture. 

We  now  find  Lot  actually  living  in  Sodom.  He 
is  now  married,  and  probably  he  found  his  wife 
in  Sodom.  That  was  a  bad  place  in  which  to  find 
a  wife.  Better  never  be  married  than  marry  in 
Sodom !  Were  there  no  other  women  whom  he 
could  have  chosen?  Had  his  own  tastes  already 
become  degraded?  Nothing  more  surely  suggests 
a  man's  ineasure,  intellectual  and  spiritual,  than 
the  wife  he  chooses.  Marriage  should  be  the  out- 
come of  the  deepest  choice  and  the  noblest  ambi- 
tion ;  it  should  be  the  wisest  act  of  life,  and  the 
fullest  proof  of  divine  guidance.  Think  of  marry- 
ing a  woman  in  Sodom !  This  name  through  all 
the  ages  has  been  the  symbol  of  all  that  is  vilest 
in  human  relations.  Abram's  nephew  married  to 
a  woman  of  Sodom !  Soon  there  are  in  his  house- 
hold sons  and  daughters  marriageable  and  mar- 
ried. One  would  have  thought  that  he  would 
have  had  more  sense,  a  nobler  ambition,  and  a 
truer  piety  than  so  to  marry.  He  is  now  a  well- 
known  resident  of  the  town ;  he  is  a  leader  in  its 
affairs.  All  these  sad  results  have  come  from 
pitching  his  tent  toward  Sodom.  His  family  later 
showed  the  degrading  influences  of  the  social  at- 
mosphere in  which  they,  lived.  Lot  is  paying  a 
terribly  high  price  for  his  good  pastures.  Men 
make  a  fearful  mistake  when  for  the  sake  of  busi- 
ness prosperit}^  they  knowingly  form  partnerships 
with  bad  men,  and  willingly  subject  themselves  to 


IVAS  LOT    WISE?  173 

moral  dangers  in  their  choice  of  a  residence.  No 
man  has  a  right  to  assume  these  terrible  risks. 
God  help  us  to  avoid  even  the  appearance  of  evil ! 

Fourth  Picture. 

Behold  Lot  a  judge  in  Sodom.  This  is  the 
rabbinical  tradition,  and  there  are  hints  in 
vScripture  looking  in  this  direction.  In  Genesis 
xix.  I  we  read  of  Lot  as  sitting  in  the  gate  of  So- 
dom. He  had  thus  thoroughly  identified  himself 
with  the  city  and  its  people.  In  ancient  times 
and  cities  the  gates  were  the  chief  places  of  re- 
sort. There  social  intercourse  took  place,  there 
pleasant  recreations  were  enjoyed,  there  the  mar- 
kets were  held,  there  public  affairs  were  discussed, 
and  there  courts  of  justice  held  their  sessions. 
All  these  things  brought  great  concourses  of  peo- 
ple to  the  gate.  Modern  Arabs  and  other  Orien- 
tal people  still  flock  to  the  gates  of  the  towns  and 
cities;  there  the  news  of  the  day  is  heard,  and  all 
forms  of  social  life  are  enjoyed.  The  Jewish 
commentators,  as  already  suggested,  understand 
the  reference  to  Lot's  sitting  at  the  gate  as  im- 
plying that  he  exercised  the  authority  of  a  mag- 
istrate. The  elders  of  the  cities  in  those  early 
days  readily  became  the  acknowledged  judges  in 
civil  affairs.  Lot  was  now  a  comparatively  old 
man ;  he  was  a  resident  of  long  standing  in 
Sodom.  He  was  acknowledged  to  be  a  leader  in 
business  and  in  social  life;  his  business  interests 
and  his  social  relations  are  in  Sodom.      Mrs.  Lot, 


174  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

it  is  fair  to  assume,  was  also  a  recognized  social 
leader  in  the  best  or  worst  circles  of  society  in 
Sodom.  The  young  ladies  of  the  family  were 
possibly  the  belles  of  the  town.  It  is  an  awful 
thing  for  a  man  to  begin  by  pitching  his  tent 
toward  Sodom ;  there  are  ten  chances  to  one  that 
he  will  end  b}^  landing  in  Sodom.  It  is  an  un- 
speakably foolish  thing  to  put  one's  head  into  the 
lion's  mouth.  One  day  the  lion  will  close  his 
mouth,  and  there  will  be  a  headless  man  at  the 
menagerie  or  circus.  Often  the  best  way  to  over- 
come temptation  is  to  avoid  temptation.  It  is 
mockery  of  God  to  pray,  "  Lead  us  not  into  temp- 
tation," and  then  recklessly  run  into  temptation. 
God  help  us  to  avoid  pitching  our  tent  toward 
Sodom ! 

Fifth  Picture. 

Behold  Lot  thoroughly  humiliated  while  enter- 
taining heavenly  visitors.  He  still  preserves  in 
the  midst  of  the  licentious  corruptions  of  Sodom 
some  of  the  nobler  qualities  of  a  generous  hospi- 
tality. Behold  him  inviting  those  heavenly  visi- 
tors to  turn  in  and  tarry  all  night  in  his  house. 
We  see  the  water  brought  for  the  dusty  feet  of 
the  tired  travellers ;  wc  sec  bread  offered  them  for 
their  hunger ;  we  witness  all  the  rites  of  a  chival- 
rous hospitalit}^,  even  as  these  mysterious  way- 
farers had  enjoyed  the  hospitality  of  Abram  that 
very  morning  on  the  heights  of  Hebron.  The 
author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  does  not  fail 


PFAS  LOT    WISE?  175 

to  mention  with  commendation  this  charming 
trait.  The  Apostle  Peter  tells  us  that  Lot's 
righteous  soul  was  vexed,  wearied,  burdened, 
from  day  to  day  by  the  filthy  conversation  and 
unlawful  deeds  of  his  fellow-townsmen.  God  did 
indeed  keep  him  from  the  grosser  contaminations 
of  his  neighbors;  for  the  Lord  knoweth  how  to 
deliver  the  godly  out  of  temptation.  Lot  was  in 
some  sense  a  just  man  in  the  midst  of  a  mob  of 
lawless,  sensual,  and  utterly  abominable  neigh- 
bors. 

But  a  greater  trial  than  ever  before  is  now  in 
store  for  him.  We  have  seen  him  extending  the 
hospitality  of  his  tent  to  his  heavenly  visitants. 
They  are  the  avenging  angels  sent  to  destroy 
guilty  Sodom.  The  news  of  their  arrival  is 
noised  about  the  town ;  the  brutal  men  of  Sodom 
surround  the  house  of  Lot  and  make  a  demand 
for  the  strangers.  Their  purpose  has  made  the 
name  of  Sodom  a  synonym  for  infamy  throughout 
all  the  ages.  The  demand  is  resisted ;  the  house 
is  attacked;  and  then  the  angels,  thus  having  a 
fearful  illustration  of  the  wickedness  which  they 
came  to  punish,  struck  the  worse  than  beastly 
men  with  blindness.  The  Hebrew  word  trans- 
lated blindness  is  bassanverivi  ;  this  word  liter- 
ally means  with  "dazzled  blindnesses."  We  have 
the  original  word  only  here  and  in  2  Kings  vi. 
18,  where  a  similar  effect  was  produced  on  the 
Syrian  army  in  answer  to  Elisha's  prayer.  In 
both  cases  a  confused  vision,  such  as  is  caused  by 


T76  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

vertigo  of  the  brain,  resulted.  Still  these  satanic 
Sodomites  madly  persisted  in  their  abominable 
purpose.  Think  of  bringing  up  a  family  in  such 
a  social  atmosphere!  Truly  Lot  was  paying  a 
high  price  for  his  good  pastures.  Truly  the 
Sodomites  were  ripe  for  the  judgment  which  was 
about  to  fall  upon  them  from  God.  Little  did 
they  think  that  vengeance  was  so  near.  Men  are 
still  fascinated  by  evil;  they  are  still  blind  to  the 
coming  of  God's  judgments.  Lot  is  now  told  that 
Sodom  will  be  destro5^ed,  and  he  is  urged  to  flee 
with  his  family  from  the  doomed  place. 

Sixth  Picture. 

Behold  Lot  in  the  midst  of  all  the  horrors 
attending  the  destruction  of  Sodom.  This  is  a 
fearful  picture ;  it  is  impossible  to  paint  its  colors 
too  vividly.  The  angels  promised  deliverance  to 
Lot's  daughters  who  had  married  in  Sodom,  but 
they  scorned  the  offer  of  mercy.  Hastened  by 
the  angels,  Lot,  his  wife,  and  two  unmarried 
daughters,  start  for  a  place  of  safety.  His  wife 
lingered,  looked  lovingly  backward,  and  was  soon 
covered  with  an  incrustation  from  the  saline 
storm.  See  him  and  his  daughters  hastening  to 
Zoar !  This  was  the  smallest  of  the  cities  of  the 
plain ;  and  to  afford  him  a  place  of  relief  it  had 
been  spared.  In  a  cavern  in  the  mountains  he  and 
they  abode  for  some  time.  Well  had  it  been  for 
him  if  he  had  remained  with  Abram.  All  his 
property  is  gone,  several  of  his  family  are  gone, 


IVAS  LOT    WISE?  177 

his  wife  is  gone,  and  soon  his  honor  and  that  of 
his  daughters  will  go.  Terrible  is  the  price 
which  Lot  paid  for  his  good  pastures! 

Seventh  Picture. 

One  wishes  to  draw  a  veil  over  this  picture  and 
forever  to  hide  the  later  scenes  of  Lot's  life. 
Only  the  barest  outlines  of  this  picture  can  be 
given.  Already  the  taint  of  Sodom  is  manifested 
in  Lot's  daughters.  They  are  dishonored,  and 
he  is  unconsciously  degraded.  Thus  sprang  the 
Moabites  and  the  Ammonites.  Many  attempts  at 
excusing  this  transaction  have  been  made ;  but 
apology  for  it  is  impossible.  Charity  covers  it 
w4th  a  mantle. 

Lot's  preservation  is  alluded  to  by  our  Lord, 
and  his  character  is  honored  in  certain  respects 
by  the  Apostle  Peter.  The  Mohammedan  tradi- 
tions affirm  that  he  went  to  Sodom  as  a  preacher 
of  righteousness.  They  still  point  out  his  grave 
east  of  Hebron.  The  names  of  Lot  and  Sodom 
are  still  associated  with  the  sins  which  are  said  to 
be  still  the  most  common  in  Eastern  cities. 

Lessons. 

We  see  the  terrible  depravity  of  which  human 
nature  is  capable.  The  phrase  "  total  depravity" 
is  not  found  in  the  Bible,  but  it  sometimes  seems 
as  if  the  thing  itself  is  found  in  certain  circles  of 
liuman  life.  It  is  often  a  slander  on  animals  to 
call   some   men  brutes.     God  alone  can  fully  see 


1 78  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  terrible  depths  of  sin  to  which  human  souls  may 
fall.  There  is  constant  need  that  we  watch  and 
pray  that  we  do  not  ourselves  fall.  Sinners  are 
often  most  reckless  when  their  hour  of  doom  is 
nearest.  The  men  of  Sodom  showed  their  great 
wickedness  in  the  presence  of  God's  avenging 
angels.  Men  little  know  now  how  near  the  cloud 
of  wrath  may  be  whose  thunderbolts  the  prayers 
of  some  saints  are  warding  off  from  their  hearts. 

We  see  that  God  can  preserve  His  saints  from 
the  worst  forms  of  contaminations  even  in  fear- 
fully sinful  environments;  but  men  ought  not 
needlessly  to  expose  themselves  to  danger.  What 
right  has  a  reformed  man  to  go  into  saloons? 
The  tinkle  of  glasses  and  the  odors  of  liquors  may 
set  his  appetite  aflame  as  with  the  fires  of  hell. 
It  is  a  most  dangerous  thing  for  some  persons  to 
go  "  slumming. "  A  noble  physician  will  not  hesi- 
tate to  go  to  a  home  whose  atmosphere  is  laden 
with  malaria.  A  true  minister,  in  like  manner, 
will  go  where  the  germs  of  moral  malaria  fill  the 
air ;  but  even  he  ought  to  be  very  sure  that  it  is 
God  who  calls  for  the  visit,  and  that  God  calls 
him,  and  not  some  one  else,  to  make  the  visit.  Let 
us  all  remember,  not  only  Lot's  wife,  but  Lot's 
selfish  choice  and  fearful  fate.  God  help  us  to 
avoid  the  very  appearance  of  evil,  and  to  turn 
our  face  and  direct  our  steps  evermore  toward 
truth,  purity,  Christ,  and  Heaven! 


XL 

WHO  WAS  MELCHIZEDEK,  THE  MYSTERIOUS 
KING-PRIEST  ? 


XI. 


WHO     WAS      MELCHIZEDEK,    THE     MYS- 
TERIOUS   KING-PRIEST  ? 

The  first  account  of  this  remarkable  personage 
is  found  in  Genesis  xiv.  18-20.  Around  but  few 
characters  of  history,  sacred  or  profane,  is  there 
so  great  a  cloud  of  mystery  as  around  this  king- 
priest  ;  and  regarding  no  man  whose  history  is 
recorded  in  the  Bible  has  fancy  played  so  large  a 
part.  This  result  is  due  in  great  measure  to  the 
sudden  manner  in  which  he  first  appears  on,  and 
departs  from,  the  page  of  Bible  history.  His  per- 
sonality falls  upon  the  sacred  narrative  as  a  ray  of 
light  from  the  noonday  sky ;  this  old  king-priest, 
like  the  flash  of  a  meteor,  crosses  the  path  of  the 
conquering  patriarch.  Thus  he  emerges  from  the 
gloom  of  historic  darkness,  and  he  almost  imme- 
diately disappears  into  the  darkness  whence  he 
had  emerged,  and  then  into  an  historic  seclusion 
wellnigh  inscrutable.  Yet  during  his  brief  ap- 
pearance, he  was  treated  by  Abram  with  so  much 
respect  that  the  mystery  of  his  personality  is 
greatly  deepened.  Nearly  a  thousand  years  pass, 
and  he  once  more  appears  upon  the  historic 
pages,  in  the  words  of   the   Psalmist ;  then   for  a 


152  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

thousand  years  more  there  is  complete  silence 
concerning-  him,  and  his  name  finally  appears, 
surrounded  with  deeper  apparent  mystery,  in  the 
fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  chapters  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.  We  there  learn  that  his  parent- 
age was  unknown,  his  genealog-y  unrecorded, 
and  the  beginning  and  ending  of  his  priestly  office 
unchronicled.  It  is  not  surprising  that  in  this 
ancient  and  enigmatical  personage  many  saw  a 
divinely  appointed  type  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the 
great  High-Priest  and  eternal  King.  For  hun- 
dreds, perhaps  thousands,  of  years  this  unique  be- 
ing has  been  the  subject  of  earnest  discussion.  It 
is  almost  unpardonable  temerity  to  undertake  to 
answer  the  question  asked  in  the  title  of  this  dis- 
course. We  may,  however,  devoutly  study  the 
passages  of  Scripture  in  which  his  name  occurs ; 
and  we  may  firmly  hold  the  conclusion  forced 
upon  us,  when  these  Scriptures  are  interpreted 
without  prejudice,  and  with  all  the  lucidity  which 
the  Holy  Spirit  may  give  as  the  reward  of  their 
reverent  study. 

His  Name  and  Office. 

Profotindly  suggestive  is  the  name  of  Melchi- 
zedek,  "  King  of  Righteousness."  The  name  in- 
dicates that  the  Canaanitish  language  was  prob- 
ably Semitic.  This  title  seems  to  be  personal, 
rather  than  official,  like  the  words  Pharaoh  and 
Augustus.      He  is  also  called  "  King  of  Salem" — 


WHO    WAS  MELCHIZEDKK?  183 

the  king-  of  peace.  Regardino-  the  location  of 
Salem  we  shall  have  occasion  later  to  speak ;  the 
name,  however,  is  beautifully  suggestive  in  con- 
nection with  this  mysterious  king-priest.  We  are 
also  told  that  he  was  "  the  priest  of  the  most  high 
God."  It  is  a  deeply  interesting  fact  that  the 
word  coJicn^  priest,  occurs  here  for  the  first  time 
in  the  Bible,  and  it  is  observable  that  it  is  found  in 
connection  with  the  worship  of  an  ancient  people 
outside  the  chosen  people  of  God.  There  will 
always  be  doubt  regarding  the  etymological 
meaning  of  the  word.  Usually  the  priesthood  of 
the  patriarchs  was  simply  that  of  the  head  of  the 
family;  but  here  we  have  a  priest  performing 
solemn  priestly  acts  not  limited  by  the  family 
relation.  The  appearance  of  this  title  indicates 
the  existence  of  a  constituted  worship  not  belong- 
ing to  what  was  afterward  known  as  the  Mosaic 
cultus.  Perhaps,  indeed,  the  Mosaic  ritual  was 
a  fuller  development  of  a  system  of  worship  which 
existed  from  the  beginning.  Significant  also  is 
the  name  here  given  to  God,  "  the  Most  High 
God" — literally,  El  Elion.  This  name  for  the  su- 
preme Deity  occurs  only  here ;  the  word  El  signi- 
fies the  strong  One,  and  is  usually  applied  to  God 
in  connection  with  some  qualifying  attribute.  It 
recognizes  God  as  the  exalted  and  the  supreme 
One.  Probably  under  this  name  Melchizedek 
worshipped  the  true  God. 


l84  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Various  Opinions. 

In   all   periods,   alike  of  Jewish  and  Christian 
history,  the  personality  of  Melchizedek  has  been 
invested  with  peculiar  awe.     Some  Jewish  tradi- 
tions declare  that  he  was  a  survivor  of  the  deluge, 
and  was  possibly  the  patriarch  Shem.    If  he  were 
this  patriarch,  his  great  age,  his  wide  experience, 
his  relation  to   Noah,  and  his  approval   by   God 
would   all   tend   to    advance   his  dignity,  and   to 
make  his  authority  wellnigh  supreme.     He  could 
readily  be  conceived  of   as  virtually  the  undis- 
puted  lord   of   the   whole   land,  and    as   entitled 
to  convey  the  possessions  under  his  control  to 
Abram,  who  received   his  benediction.      Jerome 
devotes  much  space  to  the  discussion  of  the  per- 
son, position,  and  territorial  dominion  of  Melchi- 
zedek, and  he  states  that  it  was  the  prevailing 
opinion  in  his  day,  among  the  Jews,  that  Melchi- 
zedek was  the  patriarch  Shem.     Some  authorities 
ascribe  this  opinion  also  to  the   Samaritans  who, 
although  opposed  bitterly  to  the  Jews  in  many 
things,  agreed  with  them  in  making  Melchizedek 
none  other  than  Shem.     The  article  on  Melchize- 
dek in  Smith's  Bible   Dictionary  states  that  this 
opinion  was  embraced  by  Luther,  Melanchthon, 
Broughton,  Selden,  Lightfoot,  Jackson,  and  many 
others.     This  writer  further  reminds  us,  that  Ori- 
gen  and  others  believed  that  Melchizedek  was  an 
angel ;  it  is  thus  easy  for  us  to  see  how  great  rever- 
ence would  be  paid  by  Jews  and  Christians  alike 


IVHO    WAS  MELCfllZEDEK?  185 

to  such  a  character  as  Melchizcdek.  But  a  care- 
ful examination  of  the  passages  of  Scripture  in 
which  his  name  appears  will  show  that  there  is 
no  good  reason  for  believing  that  he  was  either 
the  patriarch  Shem  or  an  angel  from  Heaven. 
Others  have  thought  that  he  was  the  incarnation 
of  some  power,  virtue,  or  influence  of  God;  but 
this  idea  was  sharply  opposed  by  other  Christian 
teachers  honored  for  great  learning  and  devout 
piety.  The  bold  conjecture  has  been  made  that 
he  was  the  Holy  Ghost.  Still  others  have  af- 
firmed that  he  was  the  Son  of  God  appearing  in 
human  form.  The  great  Ambrose  seems  to  have 
adopted  this  view,  and  it  has  found  favor  among 
many  modern  teachers.  A  former  member  of  the 
Calvary  Church,  and  a  very  learned  man  in  many 
languages,  philosophies,  and  religions,  tenaciously 
held  this  view.  It  was  always  interesting  and  in- 
structive to  hear  his  reasoning  on  this  subject, 
and  to  observe  the  reverent  enthusiasm  with 
which  he  traced  the  stately  steppings  of  the 
Christ  in  that  mysterious  land  and  ancient  his- 
tory. Akin  to  this  Christian  idea  is  that  of  some 
Jews  that  Melchizedek  was  the  Messiah.  We  all 
believe  that  Christ  appeared  occasionally  in  tem- 
porary incarnations  before  he  became  the  Son  of 
Man  in  Bethlehem's  manger.  That  he  appeared 
to  Abraham,  to  Jacob,  to  Moses,  to  Joshua,  and 
to  Gideon,  there  can  be  but  little  doubt.  If  we 
refuse  to  believe  that  Melchizedek  was  a  true 
man,  nothing  could  be  more  natural  than  to  sup- 


l86  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

pose  that  he  was  the  Christ.  The  language  of  the 
writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  some  have 
thought,  favors  that  idea.  Melchizedek  is  there 
spoken  of  as  without  father  or  mother,  and  with- 
out beginning  of  life  or  end  of  days.  We  shall, 
a  little  later,  see  that  there  is  a  much  simpler, 
more  natural,  and  more  literal  interpretation  of 
that  language,  which  frees  it  from  giving  its 
authority  to  the  idea  that  Melchizedek  was  the 
Messiah.  There  have  been  still  other  opinions  as 
to  his  identity,  such  as  that  he  was  a  descendant 
of  Ham.,  or  Japhet,  or  Enoch ;  but  it  is  needless 
to  multiply  these  unwarranted  and  unscriptural 
guesses,  and  some  of  them  are  not  only  unscrip- 
tural but  contrascriptural. 

The  Teaching  of  Scripture. 

Many  of  our  difficulties  in  interpreting  Scrip- 
ture are  not  really  in  the  Scripture  itself,  but  in 
men's  unwarranted  additions  to  Scripture.  It  is 
often  far  harder  to  understand  some  human  com- 
ments on  the  Scriptures  than  it  is  to  comprehend 
the  teachings  which  these  comments  were  in- 
tended to  elucidate.  It  is  often  much  more  diffi- 
cult to  interpret  some  so-called  Christian  creeds 
than  it  is  to  understand  the  Scripture  on  which 
they  are  supposed  to  be  based.  He  was  not  an 
ignorant  man  who  said,  while  reading  Bunyan's 
"  Pilgrim's  Progress,"  that  he  got  on  ver)'  well  with 
the  large  print,  but  he  often  found  it  impossible 
to  understand  the  notes  at  the  bottom  of  the  page. 


WHO    WAS  MELCniZEDRK?  187 

We  often  need  to  read  Scripture  afresh ;  to  read 
it  as  if  the  Bible  were  a  book  just  issued  from  the 
press ;  to  read  it  with  the  interest  which  attaches 
to  Dr.  Nansen's  recent  volumes,  or  to  the  life  of 
Lord  Tennyson.  If  we  were  in  this  way  to  read 
the  passages  bearing  on  baptism,  there  would  be 
no  further  controversy  in  the  churches  on  that 
subject.  The  Bible  cannot  make  its  teachings 
clearer,  both  as  to  the  subject  and  the  act  of  bap- 
tism. If  Christ  and  the  apostles  had  intended  to 
teach  that  believers  are  the  only  subjects  of  bap- 
tism and  immersion  is  the  act  in  baptism,  they 
would  have  used  the  very  language  which  they 
have  employed.  The  Greek  is  the  most  accurate 
and  philosophical  of  all  languages.  It  has  a  word 
meaning  to  sprinkle  and  one  meaning  to  pour, 
but  neither  is  ever  employed  regarding  baptism, 
but  always  the  word  meaning  to  immerse.  But 
many  men  read  the  commands  regarding  bap- 
tism, not  to  get  out  God's  thought,  but  to  put  in 
their  own  wish ;  such  reading  of  the  Bible  is  not 
exegesis  of  the  divine  thought,  but  is  eiscgesis  of 
the  human  desire.  Too  many  read  the  Bible 
through  spectacles  of  tradition  and  prejudice. 
No  book  suffers  in  this  way  as  does  the  Word  of 
God.  A  similar  remark  will  apply  to  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Bible  regarding  Melchizedek,  and  many 
other  persons  and  subjects.  Many  of  the  diffi- 
culties in  interpreting  the  Bible  are  of  human 
manufacture;  and  so  many  of  the  objections 
made  by  agnostic  critics  are  not  really   against 


i«5  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

divine  revelation,  but  against  human  misinterpre- 
tation. 

Let  us  study  the  Scripture  references  to  this 
mysterious  king.  The  first  one  is  Genesis  xiv. 
18-20.  Abram  is  returning  from  his  pursuit  of 
Chedorlaomer  and  the  kings  who  were  with  him, 
and  who  had  taken  Lot  and  others  as  captives. 
Abram  had  now  become  bold  and  heroic.  When 
in  Egypt  he  was  distrustful  and  pusillanimous; 
but  now  the  spirit  of  family  loyalty  and  divine 
obedience  is  strong  in  his  soul.  He  won  a  glori- 
ous victory.  He  brought  back  Lot  and  the  goods 
which  had  been  taken,  as  well  as  the  people. 
This  expedition  excited  great  attention,  and  won 
general  admiration  among  the  Canaanites,  and 
the  victorious  band  was  hailed  with  joy  as  it 
returned  in  peace.  Abram  surprised  all  by  the 
brilliant  military  genius  which  he  displayed.  We 
were  prepared  to  see  in  him  gentleness,  benevo- 
lence, and  magnanimity ;  but  we  scarcely  expected 
to  see  him  the  leader  of  heroic  exploits,  such  as 
we  are  accustomed  to  associate  with  the  names  of 
Miltiades,  Caesar,  Cromwell,  Napoleon,  and  many 
brave  Britons  and  Americans  of  recent  days. 
The  king  of  Sodom  went  out  to  meet  Abram, 
and  he  is  filled  with  admiration  over  the  success 
of  this  dashing  expedition.  Abram  is  now  in 
the  valley  of  Shaveh,  or  the  level  valley,  which  is 
the  king's  dale.  This  name  it  may  have  received 
because  it  was  used  for  military  exercises  and 
kingly  sports ;  perhaps  it  was  also  a  place  of  great 


IV I/O    WAS  iMELCinZEDEK?  ibQ 

beauty,  and  it  may  have  been  assoeiated  in  all 
subsequent  times  with  the  historic  events  here 
narrated.  There  Abram  is  met  by  Melchizedck, 
king  of  Salem.  He  is  a  much  more  illustrious 
personage  than  the  king  of  Sodom.  He  is  com- 
mendable for  his  personal  excellence,  his  peace- 
loving  disposition,  and  his  religious  spirit.  He 
refreshed  Abram  with  bread  and  wine.  He  thus 
expressed  his  gratitude  to  Abram,  who  had  won 
for  the  land  freedom,  peace,  and  prosperity.  It 
is  simply  ridiculous  to  find  here  any  direct  refer- 
ence to  the  Lord's  supper.  What  could  this  an- 
cient king  have  known  of  that  ordinance?  The 
bread  and  wine  may  have  been  not  only  for  the 
refreshment  of  Abram  and  his  followers,  but  also 
as  a  symbol  of  the  divine  blessing.  They  thus 
recognized  God  as  the  true  author  of  the  military 
successes  which  had  been  achieved.  Melchizedek 
combined  in  himself  the  offices  of  priest  and  king, 
as  was  not  uncommon  in  patriarchal  times;  he 
was,  as  he  has  been  called  in  this  discourse,  a 
"king-priest."  Balaam  was  a  prophet  and  Mel- 
chizedek a  priest  among  heathen  people.  Ciod 
thus,  in  marvellous  ways,  caused  His  light  to  shine 
among  the  benighted  nations.  The  title  given  to 
Melchizedek  is  never  given  to  Abram,  and  be- 
cause he  was  thus  honored  above  Abram,  the 
"  father  of  the  faithful,"  and  the  "  friend  of  God," 
many  Jewish  and  other  commentators  have  con- 
sidered that  he  must  have  been  a  supramundane 
being,    and  that  his  priesthood  must  have  been 


I90  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

something  quite  other  than  the  patriarchal  priest- 
hood. The  fact  also  that  Abram  paid  him  tithes, 
tenths,  emphasizes  this  opinion.  These  were  the 
usual  offerings  to  God,  and  were  a  recognition 
of  the  divine  priesthood  of  Melchizedek.  His 
priestly  benediction  on  Abram  tended  also  to 
confirm  this  opinion.  No  other  priestly  act  is 
recorded  of  Melchizedek,  but  still  others  he  may 
have  frequently  discharged.  His  hospitality  was 
simply  in  harmony  with  the  customs  of  that  an- 
cient time  and  country. 

In  Psalm  ex.  4  we  have  the  words  "  Thou  art 
a  priest  forever  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek"; 
and  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  Hebrews  we  have  a 
full  reference  to  Melchizedek,  and  an  argument 
founded  on  the  facts  there  stated.  But  none  of 
these  references  justify  us  in  supposing  that 
he  was  Shem;  for  Moses  has  continually  spoken 
of  Shem  under  his  own  proper  name,  and  why 
should  he  now  speak  of  him  under  another  name? 

The  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  tells 
us  of  Melchizedek  that  he  was  "  without  father, 
without  mother,  without  descent,  having  neither 
beginning  of  days  nor  end  of  life. "  He  could  not, 
therefore,  have  been  Shem,  for  his  genealogy  is 
clearly  given  in  Scripture  and  is  traced  to  Adam. 
Both  the  name  of  Melchizedek  and  that  of  the  city 
where  he  reigned  were  most  appropriate  to  one  who 
was  priest  and  king,  and  the  predecessor  of  the 
Messiah.  There  would  be  very  little  difficulty  in 
the  account  in  Genesis,  were  it  not  for  the  refer- 


WHO    IV AS  MELCIIIZEDEK?  191 

ence  to  Melchizcdck  in  Hebrews,  and  the  ques- 
tions which  that  passage  has  aroused.  The  question 
has  often  been  asked,  Where  was  Salem?  Jerome 
makes  Salem  to  be  identical  with  a  town  near 
Scythopolis  or  Bethshan,  which  in  his  day  was 
called  Salem,  and  in  which  were  extensive  ruins 
which  were  called  those  of  Melchizedck's  palace. 
But  it  is  now  more  common  to  make  Salem  Jeru- 
salem. It  was  probably  called  Salem  at  that  time ; 
it  is  so  called  as  late  as  the  time  of  the  psalmist. 
In  Psalm  Ixxvi.  i,  2  we  read:  "In  Judah  is  God 
known ;  his  name  is  great  in  Israel.  In  Salem  also 
is  his  tabernacle  and  his  dwelling-place  in  Zion. " 
Later  it  was  called  Jebus,  because  it  was  possessed 
by  the  Jebusites,  and  later  still  Jerusalem. 

The  valley  of  Shaveh  is  the  valley  east  of  Jeru- 
salem, through  which  the  Kidron  flows.  Josephus 
asserts  the  identity  of  the  two  places,  and  he  also 
asserts  that  the  king's  dale  is  in  this  immediate 
vicinity.  We  thus  locate  the  place  where  Mel- 
chizedek  met  Abram,  and  we  have  an  historical 
setting  for  Melchizedek  himself. 

Not  the  Messiah. 

That  he  could  not  have  been  the  Messiah  is 
clearly  seen  from  the  language  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews.  If  he  were  the  Christ,  it  could  not 
be  said  with  propriety  that  he  "  was  made  like  the 
Son  of  God,"  for  that  would  be  saying  that  he  was 
made  like  unto  himself.  Neither  could  it  be  said 
that  Christ  was  constituted  a    priest  "after  the 


192       cu?  rssrA.V£.vr  r'SFJcrzr'ss. 

Older  of  Melchizedek" ;  for  th^t  would  be  .-.irn::- 
ing-  thai  he  was  a  type  of  Himself.  A  naroral  in- 
terpretatioii  of  this  passao^e  shows  conclnsiTely 
that  he  was  not  the  Messiah.  The  statement  that 
he  was  withoiit  f^iher.  withont  mother,  and  with- 
ont  descent,  etc. .  has  really  in  it  no  serions  diffi- 
cnlty  of  inierpretation.  We  know  that  in  the 
estimation  of  the  Jews  it  was  very  importani  that 
the  line  of  the  priesthood  shonld  be  carefully  kept : 
that  all  their  g-enealogies  shonld  be  accnrately  pre- 
served, and  that  the  direct  descent  of  their  priests 
from  Aaron  shonld  be  capable  of  conclnsive  de- 
monstraticxL  Bnt  the  writer  amrms  that  in  the 
case  of  Melchizedek  there  was  no  snch  ^enealosd- 
cal  table;  that  there  was  no  record  of  the  name 
of  his  father  :r  mither:  that  he  suddenly  ap- 
peared, then  mysrerionsly  disappeared,  and  that 
thns  he  stood  alone.     He  once  crossed  the  track 

tirce  in  the  patriarch's  life.  He  is  then  lost  to 
the  sacred  wrir'ngs  for  a  thonsand  years:  then, 
in  a  few  words,  he  appears  for  a  momeri  in  :rr 
ancient  psalm  as  a  type  of  the  coming-  Lord.  He 
came  again  ont  of  the  shadows  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  and  then  retired  into  eternal  silence. 
The  -;^:er  cf  the  Epistle  is  discussing  the  priest- 
hood of  Christ ;  and,  as  a  priest,  he.  like  Melchize- 
dek,  stood  alone:  his  name  is  not  in  the  line  of 
priests ;  he  pertained  to  another  rather  than  to  a 
priestly  tribe :  his  ancestors  are  not  mentioned  as 
priests,  and  as  a  priest  he  h^d  no   descendants. 


WHO  irAS  melchizedek:  ?  193 

Thus,   like    Melchizedek^   he  had   a  lonely   con- 
spicuit V- ;  as  a  priest  he  was  a'.     '       ' 

except   for    the   likeness    to    Me: ..._ 

g-enealogy  of  Christ  as  a  man  can  be  traced,  but 
not  as  a  priest ;  and  it  is  His  priesthood  which  is 
the  subject  of  discussion.  Melchizedek  may  have 
had  a  very  honorable  ancestry,  but  it  is  not  re- 
corded, for  the  names  cf  his  ancestors  nowhere 
appear  in  the  records  of  the  priestly  office.  In 
like  manner  his  descendants  were  utterly  un- 
known ;  so  far  as  the  genealogical  records  go,  he 
was  without  desce-:.  Under  the  Mosaic  dispen- 
sation the  law  determined  all  things  pertaining 
to  the  priestly  office :  and  in  the  time  of  Moses 
the  Le'.~:es  ~ere  required  to  serve  from  the  age 
of  thirty  to  fifty ;  after  passing  fifty  they  were  re- 
lieved from  the  more  arduous  duties  of  their 
office.  Liter  they  began  their  service  at  the  age 
of  twenty.  But  the  writer  of  this  Epistle  tells  us 
that  regarding  Melchizedek  nothing  of  this  kind 
occurred-  Xo  one  knew  when  he  entered  on  his 
office,  and  no  cue  k^ew  when  he  retired  from  it. 
So  far  as  the  records  go — which  were  kept  so 
carefully  in  all  other  cases — Melchizedek  was 
without  beginning  of  days  or  end  of  life.  There 
is  no  difficulty  at  any  of  these  points :  we  have 
really  put  the  difficulties  into  the  record,  instead 
of  finding  them  already  there.  After  having  dis- 
appeared for  a  thousand  years,  srace  the  time  of 
the  psalmist,  a  reference  to  Melchizedek  appears 
to  teach  the  Hebrew  Christians  that  it  was  the 


194  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

purpose  of  God  to  abolish  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood. Christ's  priesthood  is  above  that  of  Aaron 
and  all  priests.  Melchizedek  was  a  priest  not  by 
inheritance,  but  by  divine  appointment;  so  was 
Christ.  Thus  Christ  was  a  priest  not  after  the 
order  of  Aaron,  but  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek. 
This  statement  suggests  the  harmony  between 
the  priesthood  of  both  as  brought  out  in  the  iioth 
Psalm.  The  points  of  resemblance  between  the 
priesthood  of  Christ  and  Melchizedek  are  very 
striking.  Neither  was  of  the  Levitical  order; 
both  were  superior  to  Abram;  both  were  kings 
and  priests;  both  were  kings  of  peace  and  of 
righteousness ;  and,  so  far  as  priestly  records  are 
concerned,  neither  had  beginning  of  life  nor  end 
of  days.  Abram  recognized  in  Melchizedek  one 
higher  in  ofBcial  standing  as  a  minister  of  religion 
than  himself.  Abram  gave  Melchizedek  the  "  top 
of  the  heap,"  as  the  Greek  word  rendered  spoils 
in  Hebrews  vii.  4  literally  means.  After  a  battle 
the  Greeks  were  accustomed  to  collect  the  spoils 
into  a  heap,  and  before  they  distributed  them  to 
themselves,  they  took  off  a  portion  from  the  top 
and  gave  it  to  the  gods.  So  Abram  honored  Mel- 
chizedek; so  in  all  things  Christ  ought  to  have 
the  preeminence. 

Josephus  has  probably  given  us  the  correct  view 
of  Melchizedek;  he  makes  him  a  Canaanitish 
prince,  a  man  of  noble  character  and  godly  life. 
He  seems  to  have  been  a  man  raised  up  by  God 
in  an  unlikely  environment.     He  was  a  man  whose 


WI/O    IV AS   MEI.CIIIZEDKK  ?  195 

genealogy  was  veiled  in  mystery,  so  that  in  this 
particular,  as  in  other  respects,  he  is  a  type  of 
Christ.  All  (xod's  true  children  are  kings  and 
priests  unto  God.  The  lowliest  son  of  God  in 
our  day  is  vastly  higher  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
than  was  even  Melchizedek.  We  are  heirs  of 
God,  and  joint  heirs  w4th  Jesus  Christ.  We  are 
a  preserved  people  for  a  reserved  inheritance. 
In  some  sense,  the  very  angels  are  our  minister- 
ing servants.  Let  us  rejoice  in  our  high  honors, 
and  loyally  perform  our  lowliest  duties. 

When  we  return  weary  from  some  fierce  conflict, 
there  will  be  some  servant  of  our  divine  King  to 
minister  refreshment  in  the  hour  of  need.  Like 
Abram  we  shall  eat  and  be  strengthened.  Al- 
though Melchizedek  could  have  had  no  thought  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  we  can  in  that  ordinance  re- 
joice that  Christ  gives  Himself  to  us  as  the  Bread 
of  Life.  To  us,  as  weary  pilgrims  and  as  tired 
soldiers,  He  comes  forth  to  cheer  us  in  the  path  of 
duty.  The  weary  march  and  the  heavy  fighting 
fit  us  for  His  divine  companionship  in  the  sacred 
ordinance.  Fierce  temptations  assail  us,  the 
blood  of  the  battle  stains  us ;  but  the  hour  of  re- 
freshment assuredly  will  come. 

Let  us  strive  to  be  God's  servants  for  the  re- 
freshment of  our  fellow-servants.  Beautiful  was 
Melchizedek  as  a  type  of  Christ  in  his  priestly  and 
regal  service.  Moses  did  not  claim  to  be  either 
priest  or  king.  David  would  not  intrude  into  the 
priestly  oflice.     But  we  are  both  priests  and  kings. 


196  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Melchizedek  in  his  quiet,  pure,  and  mysterious 
life  may  never  have  realized  the  great  honor 
which  was  put  upon  him  when  in  refreshing 
Abram  he  became  a  type  of  Christ.  He  gave  to 
God  the  honor  of  Abram 's  victory.  Let  us  give 
God  similar  honor.  Let  us  render  similar  service 
to  our  fellow-pilgrims,  and  let  us  ever  la}^  our 
crowns,  here  and  hereafter,  at  the  pierced  feet  of 
him  who  was  the  Lord  of  both  Abram  and  Mel- 
chizedek. 


XII. 

WAS  THE    DESTRUCTION    OF   SODOM  NAT- 
URAL  OR   SUPERNATURAL? 


XII. 

WAS   THE    DESTRUCTION    OF    SODOM 
NATURAL   OR   SUPERNATURAL? 

The  destruction  of  Sodom  and  the  other  cities 
of  the  Jordanic  circle,  as  given  in  Genesis  xix. 
23-28,  is  one  of  the  most  solemn  events  recorded 
in  Scripture.  The  physical  features  of  this  ter- 
rible disaster  are  deeply  impressive,  and  the  moral 
lessons  are  profoundly  instructive.  It  is  quite 
certain  that  Sodom  was  a  place  of  considerable 
importance.  Like  the  other  four  cities  of  the 
plain,  it  had  a  king  of  its  own,  and  it  clearly  was 
the  chief  town  of  the  Pentapolis.  Its  name  has 
gone  throughout  the  world  as  the  synonym  of 
degrading  vice.  These  Jordanic  cities  are  first 
named  in  Genesis  x.  19  as  belonging  to  the  Can- 
aanites.  They  are  next  mentioned  in  Genesis 
xiii.  10-13  in  connection  with  the  choice  made 
by  Lot,  when  he  and  Abram  stood  together  be- 
tween Bethel  and  Ai.  Before  them,  and  dis- 
tinctly in  view,  was  at  least  a  part  of  the  "  circle 
of  Jordan."  Then  it  was  conspicuous  for  the 
abundance  of  its  streams,  the  greenness  of  its 
grass,  and  the  attractiveness  of  all  its  features. 
It  is  spoken  of  at  that  time  as  a  "  garden  of  Jeho- 
vah."    The  "  ciccar  of  Jordan"  is  frequently  men- 


200  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

tioned  as  the  technical  expression  used  to  describe 
these  towns. 

Meaning  of  Sodom. 

It  is  difficult  to  be  absolutely  certain  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  name  Sodom.  Some  writers  affirm 
that  it  means  "burning";  but  others  equally 
learned  make  it  mean  "  vineyard" ;  and  still  others 
connect  it  with  a  word  meaning  to  enclose  or  to 
fortify.  Probably  the  word  burning  better  than 
any  other  expresses  the  meaning,  although  it  is 
possible  that  the  name  has  this  meaning  from  the 
subsequent  catastrophe.  It  may,  however,  be 
true  that  fire  had  already  passed  over  this  valley 
previous  to  the  great  destruction  now  under  con- 
sideration. In  the  account  which  we  have  of  the 
battle  of  the  kings,  we  are  told  in  Genesis  xiv.  lo 
that  "  the  vale  of  Siddim  was  full  of  slime-pits. " 
This  expression  denotes  places  where  petroleum, 
which  became  by  evaporation  bitumen,  oozed  out 
of  the  ground,  or  places  which  had  been  exca- 
vated in  securing  bitumen  to  be  employed  as 
cement  in  the  construction  of  the  houses  erected 
here.  In  Deuteronomy  the  place  is  spoken  of  as 
never  again  to  be  inhabited ;  and  in  several  Scrip- 
tures it  is  referred  to  as  a  place  where  no  man  was 
abiding,  a  land  turned  to  ashes,  as  overthrown 
and  burned,  and  as  cities  in  ashes  at  the  time  of 
the  writers.  The  fate  of  the  cities  is  referred  to 
in  the  New  Testament  as  a  solemn  warning  to 
those  who  should  live  ungodly.     Our  Lord  makes 


THE   DESTRUCTION   OF   SODOM.  201 

the  punishment  of  those  who  reject  His  gospel, 
and  who  refuse  to  listen  to  His  disciples,  as  worse 
than  tl:at  of  the  people  of  these  doomed  cities. 
Josephiis  speaks  of  the  five  cities  whose  ashes  ap- 
pear even  in  the  fruit  of  the  valleys  which  these 
cities  once  occupied. 

Location  of  These  Cities. 

Once  it  was  very  common  to  suppose  that  the 
site  of  these  cities  is  the  basin  now  occupied  by 
the  Dead  Sea.  This  supposition  makes  the  Dead 
Sea  to  have  been  caused  by  the  fearful  catastrophe 
which  destroyed  the  cities.  The  idea  was  that  the 
Jordan  ran  through  the  entire  length  of  the  Ghor 
or  valley  from  the  base  of  Mount  Hermon  to  the 
Gulf  of  Akaba.  This  theory  was  long  maintained 
with  great  tenacit}^  and  the  evidence  in  its  sup- 
port seemed  to  be  reasonably  strong.  It  is  now^, 
however,  abandoned  by  the  most  careful  students 
of  the  locality  and  of  the  Scripture  narrative. 
The  subject,  it  is  admitted,  is  surrounded  by  con- 
siderable difficulty;  but  although  Burckhardt  dis- 
covered the  valley  of  the  Arabah  between  the 
Dead  Sea  and  the  Red  Sea,  and  so  gave  probabil- 
ity to  the  idea  that  the  Jordan  once  flowed  through 
this  valley  to  the  Red  Sea,  until  the  convulsion 
which  overthrew  the  cities,  the  theory  is  now  seen 
to  be  untenable.  It  is  admitted  that  it  is  an  at- 
tractive theory;  bat  almost  midway  between  the 
two  seas  there  is  a  watershed  seven  hundred  and 
eighty-seven  feet  above  the  ocean  level,  and  north 


202  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

of  it  Streams  flow  into  the  Dead  Sea,  and  streams 
to  the  south  flow  into  the  Gulf  of  Akaba.  It  is 
also  affirmed,  as  the  result  of  careful  measure- 
ments, that  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  is  thirty-five  feet 
higher  than  the  Mediterranean  Sea ;  it  is,  there- 
fore, more  than  thirteen  hundred  feet  above  the 
Dead  Sea  and  the  Jordan  valley.  Dean  Stanley 
has  well  said  that  a  convulsion  which  would  have 
depressed  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  so  far  below 
the  Mediterranean  would  have  shattered  Palestine 
to  its  centre.  Perhaps  the  whole  valley,  from 
the  base  of  Hermon  to  the  Red  Sea,  was  once  an 
arm  of  the  Indian  Ocean  or  adjoining  seas.  When 
changes  came,  which  caused  the  sea  somewhat  to 
subside,  the  three  lakes  now  found  in  this  valley 
were  left  w4th  the  Jordan  as  their  connecting 
river. 

It  is  still  difficult,  notwithstanding  all  the  dis- 
coveries that  have  been  made,  to  locate  with  cer- 
tainty these  cities  of  the  plain.  Josephus  speaks 
indefinitely  of  Sodom,  but  he  refers  to  Zoar  in 
such  terms  as  to  suggest  that  it  was  at  the  south 
end  of  the  sea.  Eusebius  uses  language  of  the 
same  general  purport.  This  was  the  opinion  of 
most  travellers  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  is  still 
that  of  the  majority  of  modern  visitors  and  topog- 
raphers. Dr.  Edward  Robinson  is  very  clear 
and  emphatic  in  his  affirmations  to  that  effect. 
We  know  that  the  southern  end  of  the  sea  is  quite 
distinct  from  all  other  parts  as  to  its  depth ;  the 
northern  part  of  the  lake  being  thirteen  hundred 


THE  DESTRUCTION  OE  SODOM.  203 

feet  deep,  arid  the  southern  being  only  thirteen  feet 
deep,  indicating  that  this  latter  part  is  of  recent 
formation.  The  name  Usdum,  given  to  the  ridge 
of  salt  at  the  southwest  corner,  seems  to  locate 
Sodom.  The  name  Amrah,  given  to  a  valley 
among  the  moimtains  in  this  general  neighbor- 
hood, it  is  easily  seen  is  a  modification  of  the  word 
Gomorrha.  Mr.  Tristram,  however,  for  a  time 
gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  the  cities  were  at  the 
northern  and  not  at  the  southern  end  of  the  sea ;  but 
later  he  modified  this  view,  and  adopted  the  tradi- 
tional opinion  in  its  stead.  Dr.  Selah  Merrill,  whose 
long  residence  in  Palestine,  and  whose  careful 
study  of  all  its  features,  give  his  opinions  weight, 
locates  the  cities  at  the  northern  end,  and  Sir  J. 
W.  Dawson  adopts  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Merrill  in 
this  regard.  With  the  utmost  modesty,  and  yet 
with  considerable  certainty,  the  traditional  view 
is  presented  in  these  lectures.  It  is  not  plain,  as 
was  once  the  current  opinion,  that  these  five  cities 
were  submerged  in  the  lake.  It  was  once  affirmed 
that  the  walls,  columns,  and  capitals  of  great  build- 
ings were  discerned  below  the  water;  but  that 
opinion  is  now  virtually  abandoned  by  all  whose 
authority  is  of  any  weight.  It  is  not  even  certain 
that  the  destruction  was  caused  by  an  overflow  of 
water ;  the  probability  is  that  the  overflow  of  water 
was  a  comparatively  unimportant  element  in  the 
catastrophe.  It  is  affirmed  by  those  who  favor 
the  northern  end  of  the  lake  that  Abram  and  Lot 
could  not  see  Sodom  as  they  stood  between  Bethel 


204  OLD    TESTAMEKT  DIFFICULTIES. 

and  Ai,  except  the  cities  were  located  at  the 
northern  end  of  the  lake.  But  it  should  be  borne 
in  mind  that  if  they  saw  a  part  of  the  circle,  that 
fact  would  meet  all  the  requirements  of  the  his- 
tory. Neither  is  the  account  of  the  invasion  of 
the  five  kings  conclusive  evidence  that  the  cities 
were  at  the  northern  end  of  the  lake ;  nor  3'et  is  it 
convincing  as  to  that  location  w^hen  reference  is 
made  to  Abram's  view  of  the  evidences  of  de- 
struction as  he  witnessed  them  from  some  point 
near  Hebron.  The  Scripture  reference  to  Zoar 
gives  great  weight  to  the  traditional  view  that  the 
cities  were  at  the  southern  end  of  the  lake.  No 
one  can  carefully  note  the  differences  between  the 
depths  of  the  lower  part  of  the  lake  and  its  other 
portions,  to  which  reference  has  been  made,  with- 
out feeling  that  some  terrible  catastrophe  produced 
the  portion  of  the  lake  below  the  Tongue,  or  El- 
Lisan. 

The  Dead  Sea. 

In  studying  this  sea  we  must  entirely  divest  our 
minds  of  all  the  superstitions  which  are  attached 
to  it  by  all  mediaeval  and  by  some  modern  trav- 
ellers. 

The  idea  that  no  bird  could  fly  across  the  sur- 
face without  immediately  perishing,  and  that  the 
touch  of  its  water  was  fatal  to  health,  and  even  to 
life,  is  an  utterly  groundless  and  even  ridiculous 
superstition.  Ignorant  monks  are  largely  respon- 
sible for  these  foolish  and  false  notions.     There 


THE  DESTRUCTIOA^  OF   SODOM.  205 

is  not  in  them  a  single  element  of  truth.  Whether 
seen  in  sunshine  or  storm,  the  Dead  Sea  is  an  im- 
pressive and  beautiful  sheet  of  water.  It&  waters 
are  pellucid  to  a  remarkable  degree,  and  they  are 
also  free  from  the  pollution  common  to  many  of 
our  inland  lakes.  The  neighborhood  of  this  sea 
before  the  destruction  of  Sodom  was  a  favorite 
resort  for  invalids  and  pleasure-seekers,  and  it 
would  not  be  at  all  surprising  if  it  should  once 
more  become  an  attractive  place  for  travellers, 
and,  at  certain  seasons  of  the  year,  for  invalids. 
Great  hotels  may  yet  be  erected  on  its  shores,  and 
lines  of  railways  may  carry  travellers  to  its  vicin- 
ity. Nothing  can  surpass  the  brilliant  colors  seen 
in  its  direction  and  over  the  mountains  of  Moab 
as  one  looks  out  over  both  from  the  Mount  of 
Olives.  The  brilliant  tints  in  Holman  Hunt's 
"  Scapegoat"  are  not  an  exaggeration  of  the 
glowing  colors  over  sea  and  mountains  under  the 
rays  of  the  setting  sun.  No  one  who  has  enjoyed 
that  sight  will  ever  forget  the  glory  of  the  burn- 
ished mountains  and  the  resplendent  sea.  The 
enormous  evaporation  explains  in  part  these  at- 
mospheric effects,  which  transform  sea,  moun- 
tains, and  sky  into  a  fairyland  of  wondrous  splen- 
dor and  glory. 

Its  Names. 

The  Dead  Sea  is  a  name  entirely  unknown  to 
Bible  writers.  They  call  it  the  Salt  Sea,  the  Sea 
of  the  Plain,  the  East  Sea,  and  once  simply  The 


2o6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

Sea.  The  Greeks  and  the  Romans  called  it  the 
Asphaltic  Lake.  The  absence  of  living  creatures 
in  its  waters,  and  the  supposed  deadly  influence 
of  its  neighborhood,  led  to  its  being  called  the 
Dead  Sea.  The  Arabs  call  it  Bahr  Lut,  or  the 
Sea  of  Lot.  Until  after  the  fearful  catastrophe, 
with  which  its  name  is  associated,  no  notions  of 
horror  attach  to  its  name.  The  valley  of  the  Dead 
Sea  and  of  the  Jordan  is  between  fifteen  and  six- 
teen miles  from  Jerusalem.  The  Mediterranean 
Sea  is  t went}- six  hundred  feet  below  Jerusalem, 
but  this  descent  is  spread  over  about  thirty-five 
miles ;  recent  and  skilful  measurements  show  that 
the  Dead  Sea  is  thirteen  hundred  feet  below  the 
Mediterranean,  and  almost  four  thousand  feet  be- 
low Jerusalem,  although  the  distance  is  less  than 
half  that  to  the  Mediterranean.  Sir  J.  W.  Daw- 
son informs  us  that  the  descent  from  Jerusalem 
to  the  Jordan  is  about  the  rate  of  one  foot  in 
twenty  feet.  The  differences  in  climate  are  cor- 
respondingly great.  One  may  leave  a  temperate 
climate  at  Jerusalem,  go  fifteen  miles,  and  find  a 
tropical  climate  at  the  Jordan ;  one  may  leave,  as 
was  true  in  January,  1884,  snow-drifts  five  feet 
deep  at  the  Jaffa  Gate  at  Jerusalem,  go  fifteen 
miles  to  Jericho,  and  find  there  a  warm  and 
even  a  sultry  atmosphere.  The  marked  diversi- 
ties in  climate  and  soil  in  Palestine  must  have  had 
a  great  influence  on  the  habits  and  character  of 
the  people.  The  Dead  Sea  occupies  the  lowest 
part  of  the  crevasse,  about  two  hundred  and  fift}^ 


THE  DESTRUCTION  OF   SODOM.  207 

miles  long,  reaching-  from  the  foot  of  Mount  Her- 
mon  to  the  Gnlf  of  Akaba.  The  Dead  Sea  is 
forty-six  miles  long,  and  is  over  ten  miles  wide 
at  its  greatest  breadth.  Its  area  is  three  hundred 
square  miles.  It  receives  numerous  perennial 
streams  and  winter  torrents  on  the  east  and  south, 
besides  the  full  stream  of  the  Jordan,  which  pours 
into  it,  it  is  estimated,  six  million  tons  of  water 
daily;  and  this  entire  amount  is  carried  off  by 
the  great  evaporation.  It  is  not  difficult  to  see 
how  the  hot  and  dry  atmosphere  is  capable  of 
absorbing  this  enormous  quantity  of  water.  The 
sea  has  no  outlet,  visible  or  invisible.  In  the 
nature  of  the  case,  it  cannot  have  an  outlet,  ex- 
cept there  be,  as  was  once  supposed,  a  great  pit 
at  its  bottom,  leading  to  the  centre  of  the  earth. 
It  is  the  most  depressed  sheet  of  water  on  the 
globe.  Lake  Urmia  in  Persia,  seven  miles  from 
the  town  of  Urmia,  is  said  to  be  more  salt  than 
the  Dead  Sea,  and  Lake  Elton,  which  is  on  the 
steppes  east  of  the  Volga,  and  which  supplies  a 
great  part  of  the  salt  of  Russia,  is  also,  perhaps, 
more  salt,  although  it  is  difficult  to  get  authorita- 
tive figures.  The  great  Salt  Lake  of  Utah  has 
marked  features  in  common  with  the  Dead  Sea; 
and  this  physical  likeness  confirmed  the  early 
Mormons  in  the  belief  that  this  salt  sea  and  its 
river  Jordan  were  indeed  parts  of  a  second  land  of 
promise.  The  American  salt  sea  is  daily  losing 
its  saltness,  and  what  the  final  result  will  be  it  is 
difficult  to  determine.     The  fish,  which  are  car- 


2o8         OLD   TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

ried  down  by  the  Jordan  to  the  Dead  Sea,  die 
almost  immediately,  and  even  fish  accustomed  to 
the  Mediterranean  die  soon  in  the  Dead  Sea. 
The  Jordan  pushes  its  brown  waters  for  a  consid- 
erable distance  into  the  sea,  but  it  soon  loses  its 
vitality  and  becomes  sluggish.  In  the  afternoon 
a  deep  haze  rises  and  hangs  over  the  sea  and  the 
vicinity,  and  it  may  be  well  likened  to  "  the  smoke 
going  up  forever  and  ever. " 

The  huge  barrier  of  fossil  salt,  which  is  at  the 
south  end,  accounts  in  part  for  the  saltness  of  the 
sea,  and  the  great  evaporation  of  fresh  water  com- 
pletes the  result  in  that  direction.  The  waters 
are  usually  placid,  and  are  quite  inodorous,  blue, 
limpid,  and  beautiful.  The  degree  of  saltness 
depends  naturally  upon  the  nearness  of  fresh- 
water streams  pouring  into  the  sea.  The  waters 
have  a  heavy  and  oily  aspect.  A  gallon  of  dis- 
tilled water  weighs  ten  pounds ;  a  gallon  of  Dead 
Sea  water  twelve  and  a  quarter  pounds.  A  large 
part  of  this  extra  weight  is  chloride  of  sodium, 
or  common  salt;  chloride  of  magnesium  causes 
the  bitter  taste,  and  chloride  of  calcium  gives  it 
its  oily  feeling.  So  dense  is  the  water  that  float- 
ing is  easy,  but  sinking  is  difficult ;  swimming  is 
also  difficult,  as  the  feet  constantly  rise  to  the  sur- 
face. One  rolls  about  in  the  water  like  a  cork 
tub,  and  one  can  almost  sit  in  it  as  he  would  in  a 
rocking-chair.  Horses  experience  strange  sensa- 
tions in  it,  as  their  feet  constantly  rise  above  the 
water.     Irritation  of  the  skin  often  results  from 


THE  DESTRUCTIOy   OF   SODOM.  209 

bathing,  especially  if  there  arc  abrasions  of  the 
skin,  as  there  are  sure  to  be  in  a  country  where 
insects  so  abound.  In  1848  Lieutenant  Lynch,  of 
the  United  States  navy,  spent  three  weeks  in  a 
survey  of  the  Dead  Sea.  It  is  said  that,  while 
coming  in  metallic  boats  into  the  sea  from  the  Jor- 
dan, he  met  a  gale,  and  the  heavy  waves  struck  the 
boat  as  if  they  were  the  sledge-hammers  of  Titans. 
Ducks  occasionally  may  be  seen  floating  on  the 
water,  utterly  contradicting  the  mediaeval  theory 
regarding  the  water  and  its  immediate  atmosphere. 
Bare  mountain  ranges  flank  the  sea,  rising  from 
fifteen  hundred  to  two  thousand  feet. 

Great  quantities  of  bitumen,  sulphur,  and  musca 
are  found  on  the  shores ;  from  the  latter  souvenirs 
are  made  and  offered  for  sale  in  Bethlehem  and 
Jerusalem ;  this  substance  takes  on  a  fine  polish, _ 
and  will  burn  like  cannel  coal,  but  emits  an  al- 
most intolerable  odor.  The  low  promontory  called 
"El-Lisan,"  the  Tongue,  pushes  westward  and 
northward  into  the  sea  from  the  eastern  shore ;  it  is 
ten  miles  long  and  from  five  to  six  miles  wide.  The 
greatest  depth  of  the  sea  is  thirteen  hundred  feet, 
but  south  of  the  Tongue  the  circular  bay,  as  already 
remarked,  is  only  about  thirteen  feet  deep.  The 
depth  of  the  sea  varies  considerably  according  to 
the  season.  It  is  certainly  a  remarkable  sheet  of 
water.  Lake  Sir-I-Kol  is  fifteen  thousand  six 
hundred  feet  above  the  level  of  the  sea ;  this  is  the 
most  elevated  sheet  of  water  on  the  globe,  and  it 
is  well  called  by  the  natives,  Bain-i-dimiah^  mean- 
14 


2IO  OLD    TESTAMENT   DIFFICULTIES. 

ing  "  the  roof  of  the  world. "  The  river  Oxus  rises 
in  this  lake.  As  it  is  the  most  elevated  body  of 
water,  so  the  Dead  Sea  is  the  most  depressed. 
Beautiful  as  it  is  in  many  respects,  it  is  still  a 
steaming  caldron,  and  so  great  is  the  evaporation 
that  it  can  never  be  filled  to  overflowing.  The 
most  impressive  thought  in  Norway,  as  one 
watches  the  splendor  of  the  midnight  sun,  is  that 
of  deep  and  almost  holy  awe,  in  the  midst  of  the 
profound  silence  and  the  golden  sunshine  of  the 
midnight  hour.  In  like  manner,  a  sense  of  death- 
like silence,  of  deepest  awe,  and  of  the  conscious- 
ness of  a  holy  presence  impresses  the  mind  and 
heart  as  one  stands  by  the  shores  of  this  mysteri- 
ous sea. 

Physical  Causes  of  the  Catastrophe. 

To  the  discussion  of  this  thought  all  previous 
remarks  have  tended.  Here  we  are  to  see  the 
meeting  of  the  natural  and  the  supernatural.  If 
we  find  adequate  physical  causes  for  the  fearful 
cataclysm,  let  no  one  say  that  we  on  that  account 
deny  the  supernatural  element  in  the  destruction 
of  Sodom.  God  can  avail  Himself  of  His  resources 
stored  up  in  the  heart  of  the  earth  as  truly  as  of 
His  resources  in  the  region  vaguely  called  the 
heavens.  They  are  inadequate,  and  often  inac- 
curate, interpreters  of  the  Scriptures  who  refuse 
to  see  the  presence  of  God  in  the  physical  as  well 
as  in  the  spiritual  forces  employed.  These  inter- 
preters are  often  unfair  to  those  who   see  God  as 


THE   DESTRUCTIOX   OF  SODOM.  2TI 

truly  on  earth  as  in  heaven.  The  men  who  say 
that  if  we  give  due  place  to  physical  phenomena 
we  are  disloyal  to  the  Scripture  and  its  divine 
author ;  who  say  that  if  Jonah  g-oes  the  Bible  goes, 
the  church  goes,  and  Jesus  goes,  are  guilty  of  ex- 
treme folly,  alike  in  their  interpretations  of  and 
deductions  from  Holy  Scripture.  We  firmly  be- 
lieve in  the  historicity  of  the  story  of  Jonah,  but 
if  it  could  be  proved  that  the  story  were  not  his- 
toric, neither  the  Bible  nor  Jesus  would  go.  We 
firmly  believe  that  the  divine  character  and  mis- 
sion of  Jesus  Christ  do  not  depend  for  their  reality 
upon  any  man's  interpretation  of  the  story  of 
Jonah.  Men  who  make  statements  of  this  kind 
play  directly  into  the  hands  of  unbelievers ;  such 
men  do  all  in  their  power  to  give  away  much  of 
their  case.  Unbelievers  will  attack  the  outposts 
of  these  men,  and  perhaps  carry  some  insignifi- 
cant place  of  defence,  and  then,  -in  harmony  with 
the  admission  of  these  interpreters,  unbelievers 
will  claim  that  they  have  captured  the  citadel. 

We  may  believe  that  the  Bible  does  not  say, 
when  fairly  interpreted,  that  the  sun  and  moon 
stood  still  at  the  command  of  Joshua;  indeed,  we 
may  be  unable  to  discover  that  Joshua  really  ever 
gave  such  a  command.  Do  we  therefore  deny 
the  supernatural?  Are  we  therefore  infidel  toward 
the  Bible  and  disloyal  toward  God?  Who  has  the 
right  so  to  assert?  In  adopting  such  an  interpre- 
tation we  may  be  simply  showing  our  loyalty  to 
the  exact  teaching  of  the  Bible  and  our  devotion 


212  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

to  its  divine  author.  Personally  we  may  believe 
that  ravens  fed  Elijah  at  the  brook  Cherith ;  but 
if  another  interprets  the  word  orebiin^  translated 
ravens  in  our  common  version,  to  mean,  as  it  may 
mean,  with  slight  vowel  changes  which  no  sen- 
sible man  considers  to  be  authoritative,  *'  Ara- 
bians," or  "merchants,"  or  "the  people  of  Orbi," 
a  neighboring  town,  what  right  have  we  to  charge 
him  with  denying  the  Bible?  He  may  be  only  the 
more  strict  in  his  adherence  to  the  Bible.  Some 
men  think  that  if  we  deny  or  doubt  their  inter- 
pretation of  certain  difficult  passages  we  are  dis- 
believers of  the  Bible  and  no  better  than  publi- 
cans and  sinners.  Their  word  they  deem  to  be 
virtually  God's  word.  Who  made  these  men 
masters  in  Israel?  Whence  gained  they  such 
wisdom?  The  more  unscholarly  they  are  the 
more  authoritative  do  they  become.  Spiritual 
insight  into  the  Bible  is  one  thing ;  it  is  the  chief 
thing  in  studying  certain  passages.  But  other 
parts  can  be  understood  only  by  accurate  scholar- 
ship as  the  result  of  prolonged  and  devout  study 
of  history,  philology,  archeology,  and  related 
sciences.  Certain  peripatetic  evangelists  are 
largely  responsible  for  these  unscholarly  inter- 
pretations, illogical  deductions,  and  unscriptural 
affirmations.  However  good  their  intentions 
may  be,  the  practical  result  of  their  methods  is 
to  weaken  the  authority  of  Scripture,  and  to  dis- 
honor its  divine  Author. 

In  discovering  the  attendant  physical  phenom- 


THK   DESTRUCTION'  OF  SODOM.  213 

ena  in  the  destruction  of  Sodom  we  recognize  God 
as  the  God  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  recognize 
this  fearful  catastrophe  as  perfectly  natural,  so 
far  as  regards  the  means  employed,  and  as  en- 
tirely supernatural  so  far  as  regards  their  employ- 
ment at  that  time,  for  that  purpose,  and  in  the 
severe  degree  which  secured  the  result.  We  are 
told  in  Genesis  xiv.  10,  as  we  have  already  seen, 
that  slime-pits  abounded  in  this  vicinity.  What 
are  slime-pits?  Simply  petroleum  wells.  Where- 
ever  bitumen  abounds  eruptions  are  liable  to 
occur.  Petroleum  exudes  from  the  rocks,  both 
on  the  sides  and  on  the  bottom,  of  the  Dead  Sea; 
it  is  then  hardened  by  evaporation,  and  asphal- 
tum  is  formed.  We  know  that  this  plain  was 
liable  to  earthquakes  and  volcanic  eruptions  from 
the  earliest  times  of  which  w^e  have  any  record. 
We  know"  that  the  Dead  Sea  sends  up  great 
masses  of  asphaltum,  especially  when  earthquakes 
occur,  as  in  1834  and  in  1837.  Sir  J.  W.  Dawson 
is  as  loyal,  humble,  and  devout  as  a  believer  as 
he  is  learned,  accurate,  and  fearless  as  a  scientist ; 
and  he  shows  that  this  valley  was  subject  to  con- 
ditions which  frequently  obtain  in  the  oil  regions 
of  our  own  country  and  Canada.  He  shows  that 
a  few  years  ago,  in  the  oil  district  of  Petrolia 
in  Canada,  a  borehole  struck  a  reservoir  of  gas 
which  rushed  up  with  tremendous  force,  carrying 
with  it  a  great  quantity  of  petroleum.  This  gas 
at  once  took  fire,  rising  in  a  tall  column  of  flame, 
and  burning  petroleum  spread  over  the  ground. 


214  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

setting  fire  to  many  tanks  in  the  vicinity.  A  village 
was  burned,  and  several  lives  were  lost ;  a  whirl- 
wind w^as  caused,  which  carried  dense  smoke  into 
the  air,  and  soon  burning  bitumen  fell  in  showers. 
This  is  almost  an  exact  description  of  what  hap- 
pened in  Sodom  when  it  is  said  that  God  rained 
upon  it  brimstone  and  fire,  that  is,  burning  brim- 
stone, out  of  heaven.  The  description  of  the  de- 
struction of  Petrolia  is  in  many  features  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  destruction  of  Sodom.  Nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  science  supports  the  Bible. 
Prof.  G.  F.  Wright,  of  Oberlin  College,  a  man 
who  stands  high  in  the  ranks  of  scientists,  shows 
clearly  in  his  volume,  "  Scientific  Aspects  of 
Christian  Evidences,"  that  the  whole  region 
about  the  Dead  Sea  has  the  appearance  now  of 
being  an  abandoned  "oil  district,"  and  that  all 
the  conditions  for  the  catastrophe  described  in  the 
Bible  were  present  in  the  inflammable  accumula- 
tions of  oil  and  gas  reservoirs. 

We  have  only  to  suppose  that  at  the  time  of  the 
destruction  quantities  of  gas  and  petroleum  ex- 
isted below  the  plain ;  then  their  escape  through 
a  fissure  would  produce  the  results  described. 
These  combustible  materials  might  be  ignited  by 
lightning  falling  upon  them,  or  by  a  convulsion 
in  the  earth.  Rising  into  the  heavens,  they  would 
then  fall  like  fiery  rain  upon  the  earth.  There 
would  be  an  eruption  of  saline  water  forming  a 
brine  thick  with  mud.  Lot's  wife,  no  doubt,  was 
overtaken  and  suffocated  by  this  saline  storm,  and 


THE  DESTRUCTION   OF  SODOM.  215 

her  body  was  so  encrusted  as  to  become  not  a 
pillar,  but,  as  the  original  has  it,  a  mound  of  salt. 
The  exhaustion  of  these  subterranean  reservoirs 
would  cause  a  subsidence  of  the  earth,  and  all  the 
facts  described  in  the  Scripture  would  follow  in 
the  most  natural  way.  We  do  God  and  the  Bible 
great  injustice  when  we  shut  out  the  natural  phe- 
nomena from  their  appropriate  share  in  this 
supernatural  event.  God  is  as  much  the  God  of 
the  earth  beneath  as  of  the  heaven  above.  Every 
unprejudiced  geologist  must  see  that  the  narra- 
tive in  Genesis  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the 
geological  features  of  the  district.  Nothing  but 
the  occurrence  of  the  events  could  have  given  rise 
to  the  narrative,  and  from  a  scientific  point  of 
view  the  account  is  wonderfully  harmonious  with 
all  the  facts  which  scientific  investigation  has  dis- 
covered in  the  neighborhood.  In  giving  appro- 
priate place  to  these  physical  phenomena  we  not 
only  do  not  detract  from  the  miraculous  character 
of  the  catastrophe,  but  we  give  it  the  greater 
prominence,  because  we  see  that  in  the  soil  itself 
God  had  stored  up  all  the  forces  for  its  produc- 
tion. There  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  narrative 
suggestive  of  the  wild  myths  which  have  often 
been  associated  with  this  overthrow ;  but  all  the 
statements  are  in  the  fullest  accordance  with  the 
physical  possibilities  of  that  historic  valley. 


2l6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Lessons. 

We  see  here  how  God  can  punish  sinners  with 
physical  forces  associated  with  their  own  sin.  We 
see  also  tlie  danger  of  looking  back.  Looking 
back  leads  to  going  back,  and  going  back  is  per- 
dition. Obedience  would  have  saved  Lot's  wife; 
disobedience  wrought  her  utter  bodily  destruc- 
tion. It  is  possible  to  be  nearly  saved  and  yet  be 
wholly  lost.  Anxiety  for  salvation  is  not  salva- 
tion.    Conviction  is  not  conversion. 

Sin  may  abound  amid  the  most  charming  en- 
vironments. Early  civilizations  gathered  about 
beautiful  locations.  Civilization  without  spiritual 
religion  is  weakness  and  danger.  God  has  hidden 
fountains  of  judgment  about  every  man's  path. 
Destruction  may  come  in  every  walk  of  life. 

Even  the  righteous  with  difficulty  are  saved. 
Angels  had  to  lay  hold  of  Lot  and  hasten,  him 
from  Sodom.  Lot  was  saved  as  by  fire,  but  his 
whole  nature  was  contaminated  by  his  evil  sur- 
roundings. Stay  not  in  the  plain.  Look  not 
backward  to  Sodom,  but  forward  and  upward  to 
Jesus. 


XIII. 

DID   GOD   MEAN    THAT    ABRAHAM  SHOULD 
REALLY    OFFER   ISAAC? 


XIII. 

DID     GOD     MEAN    THAT     ABRAHAM 
SHOULD  REALLY  OFFER   ISAAC? 

The  account  of  the  trial,  triumph,  and  reward 
of  Abraham's  faith  is  found  in  the  twenty-second 
chapter  of  Genesis.  Abram  has  now  become 
Abraham,  and  Sarai  has  become  Sarah,  and  this 
change  in  the  names  indicates  a  new  relation  to 
God,  and  suggests  a  new  development  of  their 
character.  We  have  passed  through  several 
stages  of  great  interest  in  the  remarkable  life  of 
the  "friend  of  God."  We  have  seen  him  leaving 
country  and  kin  at  God's  call;  and  we  have  seen 
him  in  the  land  of  strangers  because  of  the  stress 
of  famine.  We  have  seen  him  returning  to  his 
own  country,  and  being  separated  from  Lot,  who 
selfishly  sought  richer  pastures  for  his  numer- 
ous flocks.  We  have  seen  Abraham  winning 
superb  victories  over  plundering  kings  and  ma- 
,rauding  hordes.  We  have  seen  him  in  the  midst 
of  grievous  doubts  about  his  posterity;  and  we 
have  seen  him  surrendering  his  paternal  affec- 
tion in  relation  to  the  son  of  his  bond-maid.  We 
have  seen  him  rejoicing  in  the  possession  of  a 
son,  whose  mother  was  Sarah,  and  whose  birth 
was  in  fulfilment  of  glorious  promises  from  God. 


2  20  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

But  we  are  now  to  see  him  passing  tlirough  the 
most  difficult  experience  of  his  heroic  career.  It 
is  always  fascinatingly  interesting  to  see  illus- 
trious characters  in  trying  situations,  conquering 
great  difficulties,  and  rising  superior  over  subtle 
temptations  under  the  inspiration  of  great  moral 
principles.  Abraham  seemed  at  this  time  to  have 
been  approaching  the  serene  evening  of  his 
troubled  life;,  the  early  morning  was  over,  the 
ruffled  noon  had  passed,  and  a  calm  and  trium- 
phant evening  seemed  to  have  come.  But  just 
then  the  severest  trial  he  had  ever  known  came 
upon  him  like  a  thunderbolt  out  of  a  clear  sky. 
The  most  appalling  ordeal  now  summons  him  to 
a  new  test  of  faith.  The  intensity  of  the  strain 
which  he  must  suffer  baffles  all  description;  it 
even  exhausts  all  our  power  of  thought.  The 
terrible  blow  must  be  struck  with  his  own  hand. 
God's  precept  seems  to  be  antagonistic  to  God's 
promise.  Never  did  so  terrible  trial  come  to  a 
child  of  God,  and  never  did  a  child  of  God  win  a 
more  glorious  triumph. 

The  Severe  Trial  of  Abraham's  Faith. 

All  the  circumstances  of  this  trial  combine  to 
make  it  extremely  severe.  To  be  the  means  of 
putting  a  human  being  to  death  as  a  holocaust 
was  a  terrible  thought.  Perhaps  Abraham  was 
not  unfamiliar  with  human  sacrifices  as  offered  by 
the  Canaanites  and  the  early  Chaldeans ;  but  the 
peculiar  nature  of  his  trial  must  have  severely 


SHO  ULD  A  BRA  HA  M  OFFER  ISA  AC?         221 

tested  his  faith  in  God  as  a  holy  Being.  Could 
God  give  a  command  to  any  man  to  destroy  his 
own  child?  Was  not  Isaac  the  child  of  special 
promise  and  hope?  Did  not  the  future  salvation, 
temporal  and  spiritual,  of  millions  rest  upon  his 
life?  Could  God  give  a  command  which  should 
involve  such  fearful  consequences?  The  thought 
of  offering  any  one  in  sacrifice  is  terrible ;  but 
when  the  victim  is  his  own  son,  and  such  a  son 
as  Isaac,  the  command  is  ineffably  severe.  The 
language  of  the  command  must  have  lacerated 
the  heart  of  Abraham  to  its  very  core.  Isaac  is 
called  "thy  son,"  "thine  only  son,  Isaac,  whom 
thou  lovest. "  The  terms  of  this  command  must 
have  gone  like  sharp  swords  to  the  soul  of  Abra- 
haifi ;  they  must  have  pierced  his  heart,  even  as 
his  knife  was  to  pierce  the  body  of  Isaac.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  imagine  a  greater  accumula- 
tion of  affectionate  terms  for  testing  parental  love. 
But  we  must  not  suppose  that  God  did  this  "  to 
tempt"  Abraham  in  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the 
word  tempt.  The  word  is  here  used  in  the  sense 
of  /;-_;•,  prove,  or  test;  in  the  Revised  Version  the 
word  is  correctly  translated  "did  prove."  The 
ordinary  meaning  of  tempt  is  to  solicit  to  evil,  and 
in  this  sense,  as  the  Apostle  James  teaches  us, 
God  tempteth  no  man.  The  Hebrew  word  nissaJi 
is,  without  doubt,  correctly  translated  tried,  tested, 
or  proved.  All  God's  children  must  pass  through 
severe  trials  of  their  faith,  and  Abraham  can  be 
no  exception.     God  had  only  one  Son  without  sin ; 


222  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

but  God  did  not  have  even  one  Son  without  suffer- 
ing. But  God  graduates  our  trials  according  to 
our  strength.  Abraham  is  now  able  to  endure  a 
trial  of  great  force,  for  he  has  already  developed 
a  sublime  moral  heroism.  The  language  of  the 
command  must  have  been  so  understood  by  Abra- 
ham that  Isaac  was  to  be  offered,  not  simply  as  a 
spiritual  self-surrender,  but  really  as  a  burnt- 
offering.  Sublime,  indeed,  was  the  faith  which 
did  not  stagger  at  this  command !  It  is  true  that 
at  this  time  no  formal  prohibition,  like  that  of 
the  Mosaic  code,  had  been  issued  against  human 
sacrifices;  but  every  instinct  in  Abraham's  heart, 
as  the  father  of  Isaac  and  as  a  son  of  God,  must 
have  opposed  his  obedience  to  the  command,  ex- 
cept for  his  triumphant  faith  in  God's  wisdom, 
love,  and  power. 

The  divine  origin  of  the  command  adds  to  the 
severity  of  the  trial.  It  is  distinctly  affirmed  that 
it  was  God  who  proved  Abraham's  faith.  Could 
a  God  who  was  just  and  holy  issue  such  a  com- 
mand? This  question  might  well  tax  Abraham's 
faith ;  it  sometimes  taxes  the  faith  of  men  even 
to  this  hour.  This  command  has  been  a  fruitful 
theme  of  cavil  with  the  enemies  of  divine  revela- 
tion through  all  the  centuries.  It  is  positively 
affirmed  by  some  that  it  is  utterly  inconsistent 
with  the  attributes  of  a  holy  God.  Some  have 
endeavored  to  remove  the  difficulty  by  declaring 
that  the  entire  narrative  is  mythical;  some  that  it 
was  merely  a  subjective  impulse  on  the  part  of 


SHOULD   ABRAHAM  OFFER  ISAAC?         223 

Abraham;  and  others  that  it  was  directly  inspired 
by  Satan.  But  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  these 
suppositions  are  more  difficult  of  belief  than  is 
the  plain  statement  of  the  narrative.  God  as  the 
Author  of  life  can  take  it  away  as  it  pleases  Him 
without  any  shadow  of  injustice.  He  did  not  give 
life  to  Isaac  upon  the  condition  that  it  was  to  be 
taken  away  only  by  the  event  which  we  call  death. 
The  conduct  of  Junius  Brutus,  who  passed  the 
sentence  upon  his  own  children  that  before  his 
eyes  they  should  be  beaten  to  death  with  rods, 
has  been  justified  by  reputable  historians  and 
moralists,  because  of  the  circumstances  of  the 
case.  Brutus  owed  this  duty  to  his  country.  Did 
Abraham  owe  less  duty  to  his  God?  Abraham 
seems  now  to  have  been  on  intimate  terms  with 
God;  he  readily  distinguished  the  voice  of  God 
from  all  other  voices.  It  is  the  high  dignity  of  a 
moral  being  that  he  is  placed  in  circumstances  of 
moral  probation.  God  had  a  lofty  purpose  in  ap- 
plying this  heart-searching  test  to  Abraham,  and 
only  He  who  knows  the  heart  and  who  is  holy, 
just,  and  good,  can  determine  the  right  tests  which 
are  to  be  employed  for  reaching  the  highest  moral 
ends. 

The  event  does  present  many  and  great  diffi- 
culties, but  it  also  suggests  reasonable  explana- 
tions. We  cannot  suppose  that  Abraham  was  in 
error  in  believing  that  God  called  for  the  actual 
sacrifice,  but  we  know  that  this  was  an  exceptional 
command  for  a  unique  occasion.      We  know  also 


224  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

with  absolute  certainty  that  this  command  does 
not  authorize  human  sacrifices ;  on  the  contrary, 
the  result  shows  that  God  virtually  prohibits  hu- 
man sacrifice.  We  must  bear  in  mind  also  that 
God  never  intended  that  the  command  would  be 
literally  executed.  He  knew  from  the  beginning 
what  the  result  would  be ;  He  foresaw  the  faith  of 
His  servant,  and  He  knew  when  He  gave  the  com- 
mand that  He  would  intervene  at  the  right  moment 
to  save  the  father's  heart  and  the  boy's  life.  His 
purpose  was  to  test  Abraham's  faith.  This  signal 
instance  of  unquestioning  submission  to  the  will 
of  God  has  been  a  shining  light  upon  the  path  of 
many  to  cheer  them  in  the  way  of  obedience. 
Had  the  impulse  been  from  Abraham's  own  mind, 
desiring  to  rise  above  his  heathen  neighbors  in 
the  value  of  his  offering,  the  narrative  would  not 
represent  God  as  giving  the  command.  Abraham 
is  to  rise  to  loftier  heights  of  faith  than  he  had 
yet  attained;  his  faith  is  to  be  perfected.  He 
must  not  trust  in  the  life  of  Isaac,  but  rather  in 
the  promise  of  God.  He  must  give  his  son  up  as 
if  he  were  dead,  so  that  he  may  receive  him  as  a 
gift  from  God,  who,  as  the  writer  to  the  Hebrews 
tells  us,  Abraham  believed  could  raise  him  from 
the  dead. 

But  there  is  a  still  higher  thought  which  must 
enter  into  this  whole  discussion.  The  difficulty 
is  largely  removed  when  we  consider  that  there 
is  here  a  typical  reference  to  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ.       When    the    heathen    practised    human 


SHOULD   ABRAHAM  OFFER  ISAAC?         225 

sacrifices  their  act  implied  their  sense  of  the  in- 
sufficiency of  animal  sacrifices.  The  true  idea  of 
sacrifice  was  fulfilled  in  Christ  of  whom  Isaac  was 
only  a  type.  Isaac's  sacrifice  was  not  accom- 
plished; it  foreshadowed  its  completion  in  Jesus 
Christ,  who  in  the  fashion  of  man  became  obedient 
unto  the  death  of  the  cross.  We  must  see,  indeed 
w^e  cannot  help  seeing-,  this  fuller  meaning  in  this 
ancient  narrative.  In  John  viii.  56,  Jesus,  when 
addressing  the  unbelieving  Jews,  said :  "  Your 
father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day ;  and  he 
saw  it,  and  was  glad."  On  what  occasion  in 
Abraham's  life  could  these  words  so  fittingly  have 
their  application  as  in  his  constructive  offering  of 
Isaac?  It  is  not  here  said  that  Abraham  rejoiced 
to  see  Christ  Himself,  but  to  see  His  day.  This 
must  imply  that  it  was  the  peculiar  day  or  hour 
in  Christ's  life  which  gave  that  life  its  essential 
character,  which  Abraham  actually  saw.  What 
was  that  day  or  hour  but  the  one  to  which  Christ 
so  often  referred  as  "my  hour — the  hour,"  the 
time  when  he  was  betrayed  into  the  hands  of 
sinners?  The  laying  down  of  his  life  constituted 
Jesus  the  Redeemer  of  the  world.  When  Abra- 
ham constructively  sacrificed  his  only  son,  he  saw 
Christ's  day  as  at  no  other  time  in  his  life.  This 
is  the  natural  interpretation  of  our  Lord's  refer- 
ence to  Abraham.  If  the  entire  significance  of 
this  mysterious  command  of  God  was  a  trial  of 
Abraham's  faith,  that  result  could  have  been  se- 
cured without  directing  Abraham  to  the  place 
15 


226  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

which  later  was  the  site  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  offer 
•up  his  sacrifice  on  or  near  the  very  spot  where 
afterward  the  Son  of  God  gave  His  life  for  the  re- 
demption of  men.  Without  at  all  forcing  the 
natural  meaning  of  Scripture,  we  cannot  help 
seeing  in  Abraham's  sacrifice  a  suggestion  of  the 
love  of  God  which  led  Him  to  give  His  "  only  be- 
gotten Son"  for  a  lost  world,  and  in  the  obedience 
of  Isaac  we  cannot  fail  to  be  reminded  of  Him  who 
bore  His  cross  to  Calvary  and  died  thereon  as  a 
willing  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  men. 

The  Transcendent  Victory  of  Faith. 

This  was  the  grand  crisis,  the  crowning  event, 
the  glorious  victory  in  the  history  of  the  patriarch. 
He  was  called  to  a  high  destiny;  he  has  already 
been  taught  to  believe  in  God  on  His  bare  promise ; 
and  he  has  been  taken  into  covenant  with  Jeho- 
vah. More  and  more  does  the  glory  of  God  shine 
in  his  faith  and  devotion.  He  is  now  to  show 
that  he  is  as  one  born  again,  that  he  is  dead  to 
self  and  alive  to  God.  But  he  would  have  been 
less  than  human  if  this  terrible  test  did  not  cause 
him  indescribable  pain.  But  his  obedience  was 
prompt ;  he  rose  up  early  in  the  morning  and  pre- 
pared for  the  journey.  What  a  morning  that 
must  have  been  in  Abraham's  tent!  See  him 
starting  with  his  young  men  and  Isaac,  the  wood 
being  prepared  for  the  burnt-offering!  Did  he 
tell  Sarah  of  the  command?  Perhaps  he  had  not 
the  courage ;  her  affection  for  Isaac  might  have 


SHOULD   ABRAHAM f  OFFER  ISAAC?         227 

overpowered  Abraham's  faith.  What  wonderful 
thoughts  must  have  been  in  his  tender,  obedient, 
brave,  but  breaking  heart!  The  -brief,  senten- 
tious, and  somewhat  broken  elauses  of  the  narra- 
tive at  this  point  finely  set  forth  his  calm  deliber- 
ation and  his  unflinching  heroism.  No  one  better 
than  he  could  have  appreciated  the  apparent  in- 
consistency between  the  divine  precept  and  the 
divine  promise  concerning  Isaac ;  but  faith  glori- 
ously triumphed.  Still  the  moral  difficulty  of 
offering  a  human  sacrifice  remained ;  and  its  only 
solution  was  in  the  divine  command.  The  divine 
Creator,  within  the  limits  of  absolute  rectitude, 
will  do  right  even  though  human  reason  cannot 
understand  the  divine  action.  The  story  is  told 
with  exquisite  simplicity.  The  distance  from 
Beersheba  to  Moriah,  the  Salem  of  Melchizedek, 
is  about  forty-five  miles.  Perhaps  the  first  day 
was  somewhat  broken  by  the  necessary  prepara- 
tions; we  may,  therefore,  assume  that  they 
travelled  fifteen  miles  that  day,  twenty  on  the 
second  day,  and  on  the  third  day  they  would  come 
early  within  sight  of  the  appointed  place.  Jewish 
tradition  tells  us  that  the  place  was  indicated  by 
a  cloud  of  glory  or  a  pillar  of  fire.  Behold  the 
solemn  procession !  Was  there  ever  such  a  journey 
taken  on  this  earth?  Abraham  commands  his 
young  men  to  remain  behind  while  he  and  the 
young  lad  go  forward  to  worship.  He  dare  not 
open  his  heart  in  speech  in  the  presence  of  his 
servants.     They  might  have  interposed  to  prevent 


2  28  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  execution  of  his  purpose ;  they  might  have 
believed  that  he  was  actually  beside  himself.  On 
what  grounds. did  Abraham  intimate  that  he  and 
the  lad  would  return  to  the  servants?  Was  this 
an  act  of  pardonable  dissimulation?  Was  it  a 
somewhat  confused  utterance?  Was  it  not  rather 
an  unconscious  prophecy?  Was  it  not  still  more 
fully  the  voice  of  his  all-conquering  faith?  He 
must  conceal  his  full  purpose  from  his  servants. 
There  is  wonderful  pathos  in  the  words  of  the 
seventh  verse,  "my  father"  and  "my  son."  Did 
not  Abraham  even  now  account  that  God  was  able 
to  raise  his  son  even  from  the  dead?  Behold 
Isaac  with  the  wood  of  the  burnt-offering  upon 
his  shoulder !  Josephus  reports  the  tradition  that 
he  was  now  twenty-five  years  old ;  he  certainly  was 
old  enough  and  strong  enough  to  resist  if  his  spirit 
had  not  been  sweetly  obedient.  We  cannot  help 
beholding  in  him  a  type  of  our  blessed  Lord  bear- 
ing His  cross,  perhaps  to  the  same  place.  A 
silence,  both  dreadful  and  mysterious,  must  have 
fallen  on  both  father  and  son,  which  was  broken 
by  Isaac's  question  regarding  a  lamb  for  a  burnt- 
offering.  This  question  must  have  gone  to  Abra- 
ham's heart  with  terrible  pain.  If  his  heart  could 
have  relented,  that  question  from  his  beloved  and 
innocent  boy  would  have  melted  it  into  compas- 
sion. Only  the  scenes  of  Gethsemane  and  Cal- 
vary surpass  in  pathos  and  tenderness  this  journey 
to  the  sacrificial  altar.  Surely  it  must  have 
dawned  upon  Isaac  that  he  was  himself  to  be  the 


SHOULD   ABRAHAM  OFFER  ISAAC?         229 

sacrificial  victim.  Wonderful  is  Abraham's  reply, 
"  God  will  provide  Himself  a  lamb  for  a  burnt- 
offering. "  This  is  the  utterance  of  heroic  faith 
and  not  pious  dissimulation.  Silence  then  seems 
again  to  have  fallen  upon  both  as  they  went  on 
together ;  it  was  a  terrible  moment  for  father  and 
son.  Isaac  seems  to  have  assisted  in  all  the  affect- 
ing preparations  for  the  proposed  sacrifice.  Then 
he  is  bound,  and  the  mighty  secret,  which  must 
have  been  suspected  by  himself  and  with  difficulty 
was  concealed  by  his  father,  is  fully  divulged. 
Isaac  now  Imows  that  he  is  the  destined  victim. 
As  noble  as  is  Abraham's  faith,  so  heroic  and 
divine  is  Isaac's  obedience;  truly  he  also  "was 
led  as  a  lamb  to  the  slaughter."  We  are  grateful 
that  the  sacred  historian  has  drawn  a  veil  over 
this  affecting  scene;  we  shall  not  rudely  lift  that 
veil ;  we  shall  not  coarsely  describe  this  painful, 
solemn,  and  sublime  event.  We  cannot  but  see 
illustrations  of  the  unspeakable  love  of  God  and 
the  unresisting  obedience  of  the  Lamb  of  God  as 
the  sacrifice  for  sinners.  Abraham  is  thoroughly 
in  earnest.  With  unhesitating  promptness  he 
stretches  forth  his  hand  to  slay  his  son.  We  al- 
most shudder  as  we  approach  the  terrible  crisis, 
and  nature  shrinks  back  at  the  fearful  spectacle. 
At  this  crucial  moment  the  Angel  of  Jehovah 
interposes  for  Isaac's  deliverance.  In  this  fear- 
ful moment  the  awful  mandate  is  countermanded. 
The  title  given  to  this  divine  messenger  shows 
that  he  was  not  a  created  being,  but  a  divine  per- 


230  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

sonage,  who  often  appears  in  the  narrative  under 
the  title  of  Angel  of  Jehovah,  or  the  Angel  of  the 
Covenant. 

Just  then  a  substitute  is  found  in  the  ram  caught 
in  the  thicket  by  his  horns;  thus  God  provided 
Himself  with  a  burnt-offering.  We  cannot  help 
seeing  here  a  foreshadowing  of  Christ,  who  was 
the  true  sacrifice,  even  from  before  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world.  Faith  in  God  was  the  secret 
of  Abraham's  great  triumph.  There  was  danger 
lest  he  should  trust  in  Isaac  rather  than  in  God  to 
fulfil  all  of  God's  great  promises.  He  now  shows 
that  his  faith  rested  on  the  bare  word  of  God  as 
the  ground  of  all  his  hope.  Such  an  act  of  self- 
sacrifice  is  of  the  highest  value.  It  teaches  lessons 
of  the  utmost  importance.  It  has  proved  a 
school  of  faith  throughout  all  countries  and  cen- 
turies. From  the  terrible  ordeal  Abraham  came 
forth  like  gold  tried  in  the  furnace.  We  may 
almost  hear  God  addressing  him  in  these  sugges- 
tive words: 

"All  thy  vexations 

Were  but  my  trials  of  thy  love,  and  thou 

Hast  strangely  stood  the  test.  " 

The  Divine  Approval  of  Faith. 

The  voice  from  heaven  declares  that  God  does 
not  accept  human  sacrifices.  Man  is  rather  a 
doomed  culprit  than  an  appointed  victim.  The 
intention  was  enough  to  show  Abraham's  faith, 
and  that  test  had  been  conspicuously  given  by 


SHOULD  ABRAHAM  OFFER  ISAAC?         231 

actual  experiment.  Abraham's  voluntary  sur- 
render was  the  keystone  in  the  sublime  arch  of 
his  faith,  which  still  stands  before  the  world  giv- 
ing Abraham  praise  and  God  glory.  God  inter- 
posed at  the  right  time.  It  has  been  well  said, 
that  if  His  interposition  had  been  sooner,  Abra- 
ham's faith  would  not  have  been  fully  tested; 
and  had  it  been  later,  Isaac's  life  had  not  been 
saved.  God  accepted  the  will  for  the  deed,  the 
arresting  voice  being  heard  when  the  knife  was 
ready  to  strike.  The  ram  was  then  substituted 
for  Isaac.  Abraham  rises  here  almost  to  a  divine 
height,  for  in  his  intent  he  withheld  not  his  only 
son,  and  yet  in  fact  he  oifered  a  substitute.  We 
may  well  see  in  Abraham's  act  a  shadow  of  the 
love  of  God  who  spared  not  His  only  Son ;  and  in 
the  substituted  ram  we  see  an  emblem  of  Him 
who,  as  the  Lamb  of  God,  gave  Himself  as  an 
offering  for  sinners. 

God's  approval  was  shown  in  the  new  nasme 
given  to  the  place — Jehovah-jireh,  the  Lord  will 
provide,  or  will  see.  The  name  was  thus  changed 
from  Moriah,  which  by  interpretation  meant  "  the 
land  of  vision,"  a  name  probably  given  from  this 
event,  in  reference  to  the  remarkable  vision  or 
manifestation  of  God  which  was  there  made,  and 
to  which  fuller  allusion  is  found  in  the  new  name 
Jehovah-jireh.  There  are  many  interpretations 
of  both  these  names;  the  latter  name  is  in  some 
sense  a  proverb ;  it  declares  that  on  the  moimt  of 
Abraham's  sacrifice  Jehovah  would  afterward  re- 


232  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

veal  a  greater  sacrifice  for  the  salvation  of  His 
people.  It  clearly  suggests  that  "man's  extrem- 
ity is  God's  opportunity."  This  prophecy  had 
many  fulfilments  and  applications,  but  it  was 
literally  fulfilled  in  the  manifestation  of  the  di- 
vine glory  in  Solomon's  temple,  and  later  in  the 
incarnation,  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension 
of  Jesus  Christ.  Some  believe  that  Calvary  and 
Moriah  were  identical ;  this  we  cannot  affirm  with 
certainty,  but  the  lessons  taught  by  both  are  sub- 
stantially similar.  He  who  provided  a  ram  has 
since  provided  the  atoning  Lamb,  of  whom  this 
ram  was  a  type.  Thus  it  was  that  Abraham  saw 
Christ's  day  and  was  glad.  In  the  Mount,  in  the 
highest  experience  of  trial,  God  will  appear  to 
deliver  His  saints.  Abraham  has  now  reached  a 
great  moral  elevation;  the  angel  of  the  Lord, 
therefore,  confirms  with  great  solemnity  all  the 
special  promises  already  made.  Abraham's  off 
spring,  instead  of  being  cut  off  by  the  death  of 
Isaac,  will  be  as  the  stars  of  heaven  and  the  sand 
of  the  seashore.  He  shall  also  have  a  great  terri- 
tory and  vast  teinporal  power  and  influence.  He 
takes  his  place  at  the  head  of  the  faithful  and  as 
a  type  of  the  justified.  He  shows  that  he  deserves 
the  twofold  title,  the  father  of  the  faithful  and 
the  friend  of  God.  Thus  it  comes  to  pass  that 
the  lessons  of  Moriah  and  Calvary  sweetly  blend. 
East  of  the  Church  of  the  Holy  Sepulchre  a  spot 
is  pointed  out  with  the  idea  of  connecting  the 
sacrifice  of  Isaac  with  the  crucifixion  of  Christ. 


SHOULD   ABRAHAM  OFFER  ISAAC?         233 

Just  at  hand  there  is  an  ancient  thorn-tree,  which 
is  usuall}"  covered  with  the  rags  of  pil^^rims,  and 
tradition  affirms  that  it  is  the  thicket  in  which  the 
ram  was  caught.  Some  writers  have  gone  so  far 
as  to  see  in  the  thorn-tree  a  shadow  of  the  crown 
of  thorns.  We  need  not  dwell  upon  these  fanci- 
ful allusions,  but  we  can  rest  securely  upon  the 
great  fact  that  the  deepest  significance  of  this 
offering  of  Isaac  is  found  in  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus. 

Additional  Teachings. 

We  may  learn  from  this  most  interesting  his- 
tory that  trials  are  sure  to  come  to  the  greatest 
as  well  as  to  the  humblest  of  God's  saints.  All 
God's  children  must  pass  through  deep  waters; 
but  God  has  promised  that  the  waters  shall  not 
overflow  them.  They  all  must  go  into  some 
fiercely  heated  furnace;  but  it  is  certain  that  a 
divine  presence  will  be  with  them,  so  that  the 
flames  shall  not  consume  even  their  garments. 
God  has  not  promised  to  save  His  people  from 
trial,  but  to  make  them  victorious  over  trial. 
Sanctified  trials  separate  the  chaff  from  the  wheat ; 
they  consume  the  dross  and  so  purify  the  gold. 
They  develop  character,  ennoble  life,  and  prepare 
for  heaven. 

We  see  also  in  studying  this  narrative  the 
blessedness  of  trusting  God.  It  is  evermore  true 
that  the  time  of  greatest  trial  gives  the  opportunity 
for  exercising  the  sweetest  trust.  Abraham  would 
never  know  the  blessedness  of  receiving  Isaac  as 


234  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

one  raised  from  the  dead  had  he  not  trusted  God 
with  unquestioning-  faith.  Not  until  the  summit 
of  the  mountain  is  reached  can  we  behold  the 
grandest  display  of  God's  glory.  He  who  with- 
holds nothing  from  God  will  by  a  blessed  experi- 
ence realize  that  God  withholds  nothing  from  him. 
We  here  behold  with  new  beauty  and  radiant 
glory  the  t^ue  Lamb  of  God  provided  as  an  offer- 
ing for  sin.  Abraham  may  not  have  understood 
this  great  truth  in  all  its  fulness,  but  he  certainly 
had  some  glimpses  of  the  glory  that  was  to  be 
fully  revealed.  In  some  sense  Isaac  bound  and 
laid  upon  the  altar  was  a  type  of  man's  helpless- 
ness ;  in  another  sense  he  was  the  type  of  Christ 
as  the  deliverer.  All  the  sacrifices  of  the  olden 
time  pointed  to  Jesus  as  the  Lamb  of  God,  who 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world.  Past  every 
type  and  shadow,  past  every  symbol  and  offering, 
let  us  look  away  unto  Jesus,  the  author  and  fin- 
isher of  our  faith. 


XIV. 

DID  REBEKAH    AND  JACOB    CHEAT  ISAAC 
AND    ROB   ESAU? 


XIV. 

DID    REBEKAH    AND   JACOB    CHEAT 
ISAAC   AND    ROB    ESAU? 

We  now  enter,  in  the  twenty-seventh  chapter 
of  Genesis,  upon  the  study  of  one  of  the  most  pic- 
turesque and  pathetic  stories  in  the  Bible.  It  is 
a  story  which  at  one  time  makes  the  eye  moist 
with  tenderness,  and  at  another  time  makes  the 
heart  throb  with  indignation.  But  whether  it  ex- 
cites our  praise  or  blame,  it  never  fails  to  secure 
our  interest.  It  attracts  childhood  and  old  age 
with  equal  force,  and  holds  both  with  a  resistless 
charm.  The  inspired  historian  tells  the  story 
fully  and  frankly,  but  without  any  comments  of 
his  own.  A  thoughtless  reader  might  suppose 
that  the  sacred  writer  considered  the  conduct  of 
Rebekah  and  Jacob  to  be  simply  a  dexterous  trick, 
not  involving  any  great  moral  delinquency.  But 
the  later  development  of  the  story  shows  plainly 
how  a  just  God  punished  the  sins  of  all  concerned ; 
and  we  thus  learn  instructive  lessons  as  to  the 
baleful  results  of  fraud  and  deceit.  We  see  plainly 
that  no  one  can  oppose  God  and  prosper. 


238  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Preparations  for  the  Paternal  Blessing. 

Isaac  was  now  growing  old.  He  evidently  had 
fallen  into  physical,  mental,  and  spiritual  feeble- 
ness. It  is  clear  that  Rebekah  anticipated  his 
speedy  death,  but  he  surprised  her  by  living  still 
for  more  than  forty  years.  He  did  not  seem  to 
understand  that  in  the  purpose  of  God  Jacob  was 
heir  to  the  promises.  He  seems  to  have  been 
stricken  with  some  sharp  malady,  as  well  as  in- 
creasing blindness ;  and,  like  most  other  men,  he 
was  unduly  alarmed  by  his  physical  symptoms. 
Perhaps  he  had  not  fully  learned  of  the  command 
of  God  to  Rebekah  concerning  her  sons;  neither 
may  he  have  known  of  the  transference  of  the 
birthright  of  Esau  to  Jacob.  He  therefore  makes 
arrangements  for  bestowing  the  paternal  blessing 
on  Esau;  and  so  he  called  Esau  to  him — Esau 
bcno  haggadol,  "  Esau  his  son  the  great" — mean- 
ing the  greater  or  older  of  his  sons.  Notwith- 
standing Esau's  undutiful  conduct  in  marrying 
into  the  people  of  Canaan,  his  father  still  treated 
him  with  great  and  even  culpable  partiality.  He 
directed  Esau  to  take  his  weapons,  kclc^  a  word 
signifying  implements  or  utensils  of  any  kind; 
and  it  is  probable  that  our  English  word  weapon 
originally  had  this  broad  meaning,  and  was  not 
limited  to  instruments  of  warfare.  He  instructs 
Esau  to  go  out  to  the  field  and  secure  some  veni- 
son. The  expression  in  the  original,  as  Dr.  Bush 
has  pointed  out,  is  striking;  Esau  is  to  "hunt  me 


ESA  U '  S  BIR  THRIGH  T.  239 

a  hunting-,"  tziidaJi  li  tzayidaJi — that  is,  game  of 
whatever  kind.  The  result  shows  that  a  kid  of 
the  goats  might  have  sufficed,  but  a  cunning 
hunter  like  Esau  would  naturally  prefer  game  to 
kids.  The  Orientals  were  and  are  fond  of  highly 
flavored  and  luxurious  dishes,  and  this  is  implied 
in  the  Hebrew  which  we  translate,  "savory 
meat."  The  original  is  inatainniim^  from  a  word 
meaning  to  taste.  There  is  almost  no  end  to  the 
salts,  spices,  garlics,  and  onions  of  Oriental  dishes ; 
thus  sweet  and  sour,  oil  and  acid,  combine  to 
mystify  the  dish  and  to  enhance  its  value  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Oriental  palate.  This  Hebrew 
word  means  delicacies  of  any  kind  which  would 
be  grateful  to  the  taste  of  Isaac,  whose  appetite, 
as  the  result  of  his  illness,  needed  tempting. 
There  is  little  doubt  but  that  there  w^as  also  a 
religious  significance  in  the  meal  of  which  he 
desired  to  partake.  It  was  probably  part  of  a  re- 
ligious solemnity ;  it  was  in  some  sense  a  sacrifice 
offered  by  the  recipient  of  the  blessing,  and  thus 
it  would  be  considered  as  a  ratification  of  the  pro- 
ceeding. Thus  Jacob  killed  two  kids  of  the  goats, 
although  one  would  have  been  sufficient  for  the 
meal.  In  addition  to  the  religious  idea  involved, 
Isaac's  spirits  would  be  revived  and  his  vigor  in- 
creased by  the  delicacies,  for  the  solemn  work  of 
bestowing  the  parental  blessing.  We  thus  see 
Isaac  preparing  to  perform  his  part  in  discharg- 
ing the  solemn  obligations  which  belonged  to  his 
position.     As  Elisha  demanded  the  influence  of 


240  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

music  before  speaking  the  word  of  the  Lord,  so 
Isaac  sought  to  secure  the  necessary  physical 
vigor  and  inspiration  for  this  great  occasion. 

Rebekah's  Wily  Stratagem. 

Rebekah  overheard  Isaac  giving  his  instruc- 
tions to  Esau.  She,  doubtless,  was  greatly  ex- 
cited. A  crucial  moment  in  the  family  history 
had  arrived;  a  sad  domestic  drama  is  to  be  en- 
acted ;  plotting  and  counter-plotting  are  to  be  the 
order  of  the  hour.  When  Rebekah  sees  Isaac 
about  to  bestow  the  blessing  on  Esau,  she  deter- 
mines to  trust  her  own  skill  and  deceit  rather  than 
God's  wisdom  and  purpose.  Perhaps  she  thought 
she  was  justified  in  using  deceit  to  forward  God's 
plans;  perhaps  she  saw  no  other  way  to  prevent 
Isaac  from  thwarting  the  divine  purpose;  and 
perhaps  there  was  a  strange  mingling  of  blamable 
maternal  jealousy  and  commendable  faith  in  the 
divine  and  prenatal  oracle.  It  is  possible  that  she 
did  not  clearly  distinguish  between  the  good  and 
evil  in  her  motives.  She  is  a  resourceful  woman ; 
she  is  master  of  the  duplicity  characteristic  of  her 
family.  She  braves  the  indignation  of  Isaac,  the 
anger  of  Esau,  and  the  displeasure  of  God.  Her 
course  was  deplorably  wicked;  it  ought  never  to 
have  an  apologist.  It  was  an  act  of  cruel  deceit 
toward  her  husband,  of  great  guilt  toward  Esau, 
and  perhaps  of  even  greater  wrong  toward  Jacob; 
but  it  was  most  of  all  a  signal  offence  against 
God.     Her  conduct  has  found  apologists,  but  the 


ESAU'S  SIR THRIGH T.  2 4 1 

result  showed  that  it  never  received  the  approval 
of  God.  She  was  equally  weak  and  wicked  in 
supposing"  that  the  fulfilment  of  God's  promise 
required  treachery  on  her  part.  Her  policy  was 
hopelessly  crooked,  and  wholly  at  variance  with 
the  trustfulness  and  honesty  of  a  true  child  of 
God.  She  distrusted  God,  and  endeavored  to 
accomplish  His  purpose  by  utterly  unrighteous 
means.  She  is  a  proficient  in  the  arts  of  dis- 
simulation ;  she  adopted  the  satanical  and  Jesui- 
tical maxim  that  the  end  justifies  the  means. 
She  was  impiously  daring  in  commanding  Jacob 
to  obey  her  voice,  and  in  her  willingness  to  as- 
sume God's  curse.  One  is  startled  at  her  words 
and  acts.  She  loved  Jacob  unwisely ;  she  rightly 
recognized  that  he  was  the  birthright  son,  and  she 
also  remembered  Esau's  reckless  and  contemp- 
tuous treatment  of  the  privileges  of  the  birthright ; 
but  nothing  could  justify  her  in  the  wrongs  she 
did.  She  was  the  cunning  mother  of  a  cunning, 
though  cowardly,  son. 

Progress  of  the  Plot. 

Esau  has  now  gone  to  the  field  to  hunt  for  the 
venison ;  the  way  is  therefore  clear  in  the  home 
for  the  course  of  deception  which  Rebekah  has 
determined  to  pursue.  Jacob,  in  harmony  with 
his  timorous  nature,  views  the  matter  more  coolly 
than  does  his  mother ;  he  sees  and  rightly  esti- 
mates the  dangers  in  the  way,  but  he  is  far  more 

concerned  that  he  may  be  safe  than  that  he  may 
16 


242  OLD    TESTAMENT  Dl SSICULTIES. 

be  right;  he  cares  only  for  the  risk,  and  not  for 
the  sin  of  the  course  proposed.  He  is  not  con- 
cerned with  the  enormity  of  his  offence  against 
God.  He  fears  that  he  shall  seem  to  his  father  as 
a  deceiver,  kiuitataa,  as  one  that  causeth  greatly 
to  err,  as  a  very  deceiver.  The  original  is  most 
emphatic ;  perhaps  it  includes  the  idea  of  despis- 
ing or  mocking  another.  He  may  have  no  objec- 
tions to  the  imposition  on  his  senile  father  or  his 
open-hearted  brother,  but  he  is  greatly  alarmed 
lest  he  should  be  detected  in  his  frauds,  and  so  a 
curse  and  not  a  blessing  should  come  upon  him 
from  his  father.  Rebekah  might  have  gone  to 
Isaac,  if  she  found  that  he  was  determined  to  give 
the  birthright  to  Esau,  and  might  have  urged  him 
to  follow  the  counsels  of  God.  The  temptation 
which  came  to  her  was  in  its  essence  that  which 
came  to  our  Lord  in  the  wilderness,  when  Satan 
offered  Him  the  kingdoms  of  the  world  if  he  would 
give  Satan  His  homage ;  it  is  the  temptation  which 
comes  to  all  of  us  in  every  walk  of  life ;  it  is  the 
temptation  which  we  must  resist  with  holy  indig- 
nation, or  before  which  we  shall  fall  in  hopeless 
subjection. 

Jacob's  Acquiescence. 

Rebekah  assured  her  son  that  she  would  take 
the  curse  upon  herself.  She  ran  a  fearful  risk  in 
making  such  a  declaration,  and  she  thus  mani- 
fested a  low  tone  of  moral  sentiment.  She  could 
not  take  Jacob's  curse,  even  if  she  would;  only 


ESAU'S  B/R THRICH T.  243 

the  compassionate  Saviour  of  sinners,  who  bore 
our  sins  in  His  own  body  on  the  tree,  can  take  the 
curse  upon  Himself.  Her  words,  perhaps,  show 
great  faith  in  the  divine  prediction,  but  they 
magnify  rather  than  minify  the  fraud  which  she 
purposes  to  practise  upon  Isaac. 

It  is  simply  astonishing  that  in  the  form  of 
solemnization  of  matrimony  in  one  of  the  prayer- 
books,  a  petition  is  offered  that  the  man  and 
woman  entering  into  this  sacred  relationship 
should  live  together  as  did  Isaac  and  Rebekah. 
Doubtless  this  petition  is  based  upon  the  monog- 
amy characteristic  of  Isaac  and  Rebekah,  ^as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  polygamy  of  that  day;  but 
it  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  most  unfortunate  prayer 
to  be  offered  at  the  marriage  ceremony.  When 
one  remembers  the  domestic  drama  in  that  an- 
cient family,  and  the  painfully  unwifely  conduct 
of  which  Rebekah  was  guilty  toward  her  invalid 
and  blind  husband,  one  would  surely  prefer  some 
other  prayer  on  such  an  occasion.  Rebekah 's 
greater  force  of  character  entirely  overcame 
Jacob's  hesitancy.  He  goes  to  the  flock  and  se- 
cures two  kids  of  the  goats,  and  Rebekah  deter- 
mines  that  with  all  the  witchery  of  her  cookery 
she  shall  make  Isaac  believe  that  the  delicacies 
which  he  desired  are  now  prepared.  She  is  thor- 
oughly master  of  the  situation;  and  Jacob  was 
both  her  tool  and  accomplice.  She  prepares 
goodly  raiment,  hahaiiiudoth,  desirable  garments, 
with  which   to  impose    further   on  her  husband. 


2  44  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

She  also  will  cover  Jacob's  hands  and  neck  with 
the  skins  of  the  kids  so  as  to  make  him  appear  the 
more  like  Esau.  It  is  well  understood  that  the 
Oriental  camel  goats,  as  they  are  called,  furnish 
a  wool  that  is  soft  and  silky,  and  of  a  much  finer 
texture  than  that  of  the  European  goat.  This 
wool  was  often  used,  as  a  substitute  for  human 
hair.  Rebekah  will  leave  nothing  undone  to 
carry  out  her  plans.  She  could  readily  impose 
upon  the  dim  sight  and  the  dull  touch  of  the  blind 
invalid. 

A  Dramatic  Scene. 

The  scene  at  this  point  is  as  striking  as  it  is 
sad.  It  is  difficult  to  surpass  the  spirit  of  decep- 
tion practised  by  Jacob  at  this  point.  The  father 
wonders  at  the  haste  with  which  Esau  has  re- 
turned; he  wonders,  also,  whether  this  can  really 
be  his  son.  And  now  Jacob  deliberately  and  re- 
peatedly lies  to  his  father,  at  this  solemn  hour 
and  in  connection  with  this  solemn  event.  We 
must  call  things  by  their  right  names;  we  need 
not  be  more  solicitous  for  the  character  of  Jacob 
than  is  the  Bible.  Doubtless  by  some  mental  and 
spiritual  legerdemain  he  justifies  himself.  Aug- 
ustine and  others  attempt  to  justify  his  conduct 
on  the  ground  that  he  already  had  purchased  the 
birthright.  We  do  not  wish  to  criticise  with  undue 
severity  a  fallible  man  whom  God  designed  greatly 
to  honor ;  but  none  of  the  patriarchs  can  be  taken 
as  models  for  our  conduct.     They  lived  under  a 


ESAU'S  BIK THKIGII T.  245 

primitive  and  very  imperfect  code  of  morals. 
The  Bible  nowhere  justifies  the  conduct  of  Jacob 
and  Rebekah ;  if  the  Bible  had  been  written  by 
iminspired  men,  this  story  had  never  been  told. 
Uninspired  writers  often  'magnify  and  even  create 
the  virtues  of  their  heroes ;  and  they  often  minify 
and  even  deny  the  vices  of  their  heroes.  But 
while  the  Bible  sets  down  naught  in  malice,  it 
dares  tell  the  truth  and  the  whole  truth.  Jacob 
even  went  so  far  as  to  bring  in  God  as  sharing  in 
the  deception  he  had  practised.  He  found  the 
venison  so  soon  "  because  the  Lord  thy  God 
brought  it  to  me."  The  original  is  here  very 
striking,  JiikraJi  Icphauai^  made  it  to  occur,  or 
caused  it  to  come  before  inc.  Jacob  here  uses 
language  expressive  of  a  special  interposition  of 
Providence  on  his  behalf.  But  Isaac  is  not  yet 
through  with  Jacob,  and  his  falsehoods  must  be 
repeated.  Isaac's  ear  denotes  the  difference  of 
tone,  although  his  eyes  give  no  testimony.  A 
thrill  of  alarm  must  have  filled  Jacob's  soul  as 
Isaac  commands  him  to  come  near.  Martin 
Luther  strikingly  says :  "  I  should  have  probably 
run  away  with  horror  and  let  the  dish  fall. "  Isaac 
feels  the  hairy  skin,  and  it  resembles  Esau's;  still 
he  has  a  lurking  doubt,  ^nd  in  response  to  his 
question,  Jacob  affirms  that  he  is  his  very  son 
Esau.  Had  there  been  a  failure  at  this  point, 
the  whole  scheme  would  have  failed,  but  Rebekah 
guarded  against  this  danger.  Jacob  was  after- 
ward the  victim  of  the   deceits  which   his  sons 


246  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

practised  upon  him  in  connection  with  the  coat  of 
Joseph. 

True  religion  is  not  responsible  for  Jacob;  it 
was  the  lack  of  true  religion  which  made  him  de- 
ceitful. He  had  not  yo-t  passed  through  that  ex- 
perience which  we  understand  by  conversion, 
but  which  was  his  at  the  brook  Jabbok.  True  re- 
ligion was  no  more  responsible  for  this  act  than 
it  was  for  Paul  when  he  persecuted  the  believers 
in  Jesus.  In  Jacob  we  find  the  quiet  patience 
of  his  father,  and  the  grasping  selfishness  and 
unholy  acquisitiveness  so  characteristic  of  his 
mother's  family.  It  was  diamond  cut  diamond 
when  these  two  Hebrews,  Laban  and  Jacob,  were 
driving  a  bargain.  We  ought  ever  to  remember 
that  God's  promises  and  purposes  never  necessi- 
tate, certainly  never  justify,  fraud  and  falsehood 
on  the  part  of  men.  God  can  accomplish  all  His 
purposes  without  wrong-doing  on  the  part  of  His 
creatures. 

The  Paternal  Kiss. 

In  verses  26  to  29  we  see  that  the  paternal  kiss 
is  given  and  the  paternal  benediction  bestowed. 
One  would  think  that  the  father's  kiss  would  have 
burned  the  son's  cheek.  Isaac  smelled  the  smell 
of  Jacob's  raiment.  We  know  that  often  in  blind 
men  the  sense  of  smell  helps  them  to  recognize 
objects.  As  Jacob  was  supposed  to  have  returned 
from  the  field,  it  was  expected  that  his  garments 
would  smell  of  the  chase.      It  is  still  common  in 


ESA  U\S  BIR  TH RIGHT.  247 

many  parts  of  the  Orient  to  disting-uish  persons 
by  smelling  the  crown  of  the  head  or  other  parts 
of  the  body ;  of  an  amiable  man  it  is  often  said : 
"  How  sweet  is  the  smell  of  that  man ;  the  smell 
of  his  goodness  is  universal. "  Thus  Isaac  smelled 
and  kissed  him.  The  kiss  was  the  sign  of  affec- 
tion, the  token  of  friendship,  and,  in  some  sense, 
a  symbol  of  homage.  And  while  he  kissed  Jacob 
the  odor  of  Esan's  garments,  impregnated  by 
aromatic  herbs,  excited  the  sensibilities  of  the 
aged  man  and  inspired  him  to  pour  forth  his  bene- 
diction. Jacob  was  to  receive  the  fatness  of  the 
earth,  the  dew  of  heaven,  the  homage  of  nations, 
and  to  exercise  lordship  over  his  mother's  sons. 

Esau's  Return. 

A  thrilling  scene  comes  before  us.  Esau  un- 
expectedly returns.  Clandestinely  Jacob  had  re- 
ceived the  blessing.  No  wonder  we  read :  "  Isaac 
trembled  very  exceedingly."  The  painful  illu- 
sion is  dispelled,  the  abominable  deception  is  dis- 
covered, and  the  guilt  of  wife  and  son  is  revealed. 
Isaac's  emotions  must  have  been  absolutely  over- 
whelming. A  just  indignation  must  have  filled 
his  soul.  He  must  at  the  same  time  have  been 
conscious  of  his  own  wrong  in  allowing  his  unwise 
love  for  Esau  to  lead  him  to  disobey  God.  Years 
before,  he  was  willing  to  trust  God,  even  to  laying 
himself  upon  the  altar  of  sacrifice.  But  the  bene- 
diction had  been  given,  and  it  cannot  be  recalled. 
He  now  saw  that  it  was  God's  purpose  that  the 


248  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

blessing  should  continue  in  the  line  of  Jacob  rather 
than  in  that  of  Esau.  Esau's  grief  is  distressing; 
and  we  cannot  but  sympathize  with  him  in  his 
terrible  disappointment,  even  though  we  blame 
him  for  despising  his  birthright.  There  is  an 
obvious  reference  to  Jacob's  name  when  Esau 
said:  "  He  hath  ^vc^'^Xd.nX.^^—yakebani — me  these 
two  times."  Jacob's  name,  yaakob,  Esau  here 
interprets,  and  it  can  not  be  denied  that  there 
was  ground  for  these  reflections  upon  Jacob  the 
supplanter.  But  Isaac  has  a  blessing  for  Esau 
also.  With  his  name  was  long  associated  do- 
minion by  the  sword  and  great  power  among  the 
people.  To  him  a  pastoral  life  is  distasteful,  as  it 
was  afterward  with  his  race.  The  Edomites  were 
long  independent,  but  were  conquered  by  David 
and  others.  Rebekah  is  obliged  to  urge  her  be- 
loved Jacob  to  flee  to  Laban,  her  brother,  and 
there  remain  until  Esau's  wrath  shall  abate.  She 
was  the  cause  of  much  of  the  sorrow  in  her  family, 
and  she  suffers  retributive  chastisements.  She 
parts  with  Jacob,  not  to  see  him  for  twenty  years, 
if  ever  after ;  and  even  in  this  parting  with  him 
she  artfully  plans  so  as  to  conceal  from  Isaac  the 
worst  features  of  the  case. 

Lessons. 

We  see  by  this  ancient  story  the  danger  that 
men  may  sin  even  while  seeking  a  worthy  end. 
All  the  parties  to  this  domestic  tragedy  sinned 
against  one    another   and   against    God.      Isaac 


ESA  6' ' S  BN^  TH RIGHT.  249 

sinned  by  strivino-  to  set  aside  the  will  of  God, 
because  of  his  unwise  partiality  toward  Esau. 
Rebekah  sinned  by  distrusting  God,  and  by  prac- 
tising- abominable  deceptions.  She  did  evil  that 
good  might  come.  Her  course  was  evil,  and  that 
continually.  Jacob  sinned  in  a  most  revolting 
way,  in  the  transaction  by  which  he  secured  the 
birthright. 

He  took  a  mean  advantage  of  Esau's  hunger, 
and  robbed  him  of  that  which  should  have  been 
dearer  to  Esau  than  life  itself.  He  sinned  in 
obeying  his  mother  rather  than  God,  and  one  sin 
led  to  another,  until  his  falsehood  became  pro- 
fanity, making  God  a  partner  in  his  crime.  Esau 
sinned  in  despising  his  birthright  and  also  in  his 
marital  relations.  We  have  no  right  ever  to  make 
God's  supposed  designs  the  rule  of  our  conduct. 
God  does  not  give  us  His  prophecies  as  maxims 
for  the  government  of  our  actions.  We  are 
simply  to  do  right,  even  though  the  heavens 
should  fall.  Parents  are  in  danger  of  cherishing 
an  unwarranted  partiality  for  sons  or  daughters, 
and  against  this  tendency  they  must  ever  be 
watchful. 

We  learn,  also,  that  sin  must  evermore  be  pun- 
ished. Punishment  followed  according  to  the 
most  natural  laws  all  concerned  in  this  guilty 
transaction.  The  best  men  and  women  are  com- 
passed with  infirmity ;  sinless  perfection  does  not 
belong  to  this  life.  The  old  Greek  tragedies  show 
us  the  close  relation  between  crime  and  punish- 


^S^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

ment,  between  sin  and  sorrow;  they  teach  this 
lesson  as  truly  as  it  is  taught  even  in  the  Bible. 
In  the  end  wicked  schemes  prove  abortive ;  in  the 
end  the  deceiver  is  himself  deceived ;  "  the  engi- 
neer is  hoist  on  his  own  petard."  Jacob  suffered 
from  the  cupidity  of  Laban,  and  afterward  from 
the  deception  of  his  own  sons.  Terrible  was  the 
sorrow  of  Rebekah  as  she  parts,  probably  forever, 
from  her  beloved  Jacob.  As  the  chief  offender, 
she  probably  was  the  chief  sufferer.  Whatsoever 
we  sow  that  shall  we  reap ;  that  is  one  of  the  most 
solemn  statements  in  the  whole  Bible.  As  God 
lives,  the  man  who  sows  the  wind  shall  reap  the 
whirlwind.  Thank  God!  there  is  forgiveness 
with  Him,  if  we  but  turn  to  Him  in  penitence  and 
faith. 

We  read  that  "  Esau  found  no  place  of  repent- 
ance, though  he  sought  it  carefully  with  tears." 
We  must  not  suppose  that  Esau,  washing  to  re- 
pent, could  not;  the  meaning  clearly  is  that  he 
sought  for  his  father's  repentance,  in  the  sense  of 
a  change  in  his  purpose ;  but  all  his  tears  could 
not  change  that  purpose.  He  sowed  to  the  flesh, 
and  he  could  not  expect  to  reap  the  fruit  of  the 
spirit.  We  sympathize  with  him  in  his  great  and 
bitter  cry,  and  in  contrast  with  his  dashing  con- 
duct we  stigmatize  the  mean  cupidity  and  com- 
mercial sharpness  of  Jacob;  but  Esau's  cry  is 
simply  that  of  one  who  did  not  heed  God's  warn- 
ing, and  who  despised  God's  gracious  gifts.  He 
threw  away  his  blessing  for  a  mess  of  pottage, 


ESAU'S  BIR THRIGII T.  251 

and  he  cannot  now  get  it  for  a  flood  of  tears. 
Happy  are  they  who  know  the  time  of  grace,  and 
who  do  not  despise  the  opportunity  of  mercy. 
Esau's  tears  are  too  late;  he  must  reap  as  he 
sowed.  We  also  have  a  great  and  glorious  birth- 
right, and  we  also  may  lose  it  for  some  temporary 
pleasure.  Adam  and  Eve  sold  theirs  for  a  little 
fruit.  God  help  us  not  to  choose  baubles  for 
diamonds,  earth  for  heaven,  time  for  eternity, 
and  self  for  Christ ! 


XV. 

WHO    WAS   THE   WRESTLER    WITH   JACOB 
AT  JABBOK  ? 


XV. 

WHO    WAS    THE    WRESTLER   WITH 
JACOB   AT   JABBOK? 

In  the  3 2d  chapter  of  Genesis  we  have  an  ac- 
count of  the  turning-point  in  the  life  of  Jacob. 
We  here  see  another  wonderful  event  in  the  stir- 
ring career  of  this  historic  patriarch.  Before  this 
period  we  observed  his  cunning  devices,  his  nu- 
merous artifices,  and  his  intense  selfism,  growing 
out  of  a  weak  and  defective  faith.  But  after  this 
period  we  shall  notice  his  great  humility,  com- 
mendable resignation,  and  beautiful  confidence  as 
a  child  of  God  and  a  patriarch  of  Israel.  The  old 
Jacob,  with  his  desire  to  supplant  his  brother  and 
his  uncle  by  his  commercial  shrewdness,  disap- 
pears; the  new  Jacob,  who  is  now  Israel,  appears 
and  remains  ever  afterward  on  the  historic  page. 
It  required  much  sorrow,  many  trials,  and  severe 
chastisements  to  eliminate  Jacob  and  to  introduce 
Israel.  All  the  previous  events  in  his  life  were 
but  the  divine  preparations  for  his  change  of  heart 
and  of  name.  Hitherto  his  conduct  was  that  of  a 
clever,  self-reliant,  and  not  over-scrupulous  man ; 
hitherto  he  has  fought  with  the  weapons  of  human 
shrewdness  and  unholy  cunning.  Now  we  are  to 
see  him  relying  on  God  and  doing  his  duty  as  a 


256  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

follower  of  the  holy  One,  and  as  the  head  of  a 
great  race.  We  are  now  to  enter  upon  the  period 
which  marks  his  convension,  his  regeneration,  his 
consecration  as  a  true  servant  of  God. 

Preparing  to  Return. 

His  departure  from  Canaan  to  Aram  was  marked 
by  a  crisis  in  his  life ;  so  now  is  his  return  from 
Aram  to  Canaan  marked  by  another  and  even 
greater  crisis.  We  are  told  that  on  his  way  a 
vision  of  the  heavenly  host  was  granted  to  him ; 
we  do  not  know  just  how  this  apparition  of  angels 
was  made  to  Jacob.  We  are,  however,  fully  to 
believe  that  these  angels,  malakiin,  messengers, 
were  not  merely  human,  but  truly  the  angels  of 
God.  We  may  well  believe  that  the  occasion  was 
sufficiently  important  to  justify  an  angelic  mani- 
festation. Jacob  now  has  to  pass  through  the 
land  of  Edom,  which  was  in  possession  of  his 
brother  Esau.  He  also  had  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  Esau  might  be  as  hostile  as  he  w^as 
powerful.  God's  angels  thus  came  to  quiet  his 
fears  and  to  strengthen  his  hopes.  A  glorious 
physical  prospect  is  here  before  him ;  fresh  ver- 
dure and  rich  pasturage  are  about  him,  and  as  he 
enters  the  land  the  heavenly  messengers  give  him 
greeting.  He  now  sees  that  his  late  deliverance 
was  due  to  God's  providence,  and  that  his  future 
welfare  is  also  under  God's  watchcare.  Twenty 
years  before  when,  fleeing  from  his  angry  brother, 
he  had  arrived  at   Bethel,  the   mystical   ladder, 


WHO    JI'AS    THE    WRESTLER    WITH  JACOB?    257 

reaching  from  earth  to  heaven,  and  upon  it  angels 
ascending  and  descending,  he  beheld ;  and  now, 
as  he  returns,  angel  hosts  come  to  defend  him 
should  dangers  arise.  He  rightly  called  the  name 
of  that  place  Mahanaim;  this  Hebrew  word  is  a 
dual  term  implying  two  hosts  or  camps.  Years 
before  he  saw  the  angelic  messengers  in  a  dream, 
but  now  he  sees  them  when  awake.  He  reco"-- 
nizes  them  as  the  messengers  of  God,  and  he 
names  the  place  Mahanaim  from  the  double  host. 
This  place  has  been  identified  with  Mahneh,  and 
the  name  was  handed  down  to  after  ages  as  a  place 
of  sanctuary  for  the  trans- Jordanic  tribes.  Jacob 
is  still  on  the  heights  of  the  trans-Jordanic  hills. 
These  messengers  do  not  seem  to  have  given  him 
any  verbal  communication,  but  he  could  readily 
infer  the  object  of  their  mission  and  so  become 
assured  of  God's  protecting  providence.  This 
was  truly  a  glorious  vision  which  was  granted 
Jacob  at  this  crisis  of  his  life.  In  Psalm  xxxiv. 
7  we  read,  "the  angel  of  the  Lord  encampeth 
round  about  them  that  fear  him."  The  word 
angel  in  this  passage  without  doubt  means  "  an- 
gelry,"  the  collective  multitude  of  angels.  Such 
a  multitude  we  may  well  believe  Jacob  now  saw. 
They  surrounded  his  camp,  and  their  presence 
and  the  events  which  there  occurred  have  made 
the  place  historic  and  even  immortal.  He  is  by 
the  brook  Jabbok,  a  word  which  probably  means 
"pouring  out,"  or  "flowing  forth,"  or  it  may  be 
connected  with  the  word  in  verse  24,  rendered 
17 


258  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

"wrestled."  It  is  now  the  Zerka,  a  perennial 
stream  which  flows  into  the  Jordan,  between  the 
sea  of  Galilee  and  the  Dead  Sea,  after  a  westerly 
course  of  about  sixty  miles.  Penuel,  where  Jacob 
wrestled  with  the  angel,  was  a  fording-place  of 
this  brook.  This  stream  divided  the  territory  of 
Og  from  that  of  Sihon,  and  it  flowed  through  the 
region  afterward  assigned  to  the  tribe  of  Gad. 

Sending  Messages  to  Esau. 

Verses  3  to  9  give  us  the  account  of  the  mes- 
sage sent  to  Esau  informing  him  of  Jacob's  ar- 
rival. We  now,  again,  have  the  word  malakini  as 
in  the  first  verse  of  the  chapter,  but  now  refer- 
ring to  human  and  not  divine  messengers.  This 
mission  was  obviously  a  very  wise  precaution,  for 
Jacob  fears  the  wrath  of  his  justly  incensed 
brother.  Jacob  is  ever  skilful,  cautious,  and 
crafty ;  he  knew  something  of  the  temper  of  his 
brother,  and  he  now  knows  also  something  of  hi 
great  power.  We  do  not  know  why  or  when  Esau 
had  removed  to  the  land  of  Seir.  This  was  Arabia 
Petrea  on  the  east  and  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and 
inhabited  originally  by  the  Horites,  or  "  troglo- 
dytes," who  excavated  the  singular  rock-dwell- 
ings found  in  the  vicinity  of  Petra;  this  was  a 
place  with  which  Esau  had  become  connected  by 
marriage  with  a  daughter  of  Ishmael.  Probably 
the  gradual  enlargement  of  his  domestic  establish- 
ment and  the  unfilial  deportment  of  his  wives 
made  it  fitting  that  he  should  not  live  near  his 


WHO    IV A  S    THE    I VRE  S  TLER    I VI  TIF  J  A  COB  ?     259 

parents;  we  may  also  believe  that  there  was  a 
divine  purpose  in  his  departure  from  the  land  of 
promise,  thus  making  room  for  his  brother,  its 
divinely  appointed  possessor.  Esau  thus  aeted 
with  the  utmost  freedom,  and  yet  he  was  fulfill- 
ing the  divine  purpose  in  the  course  he  adopted. 
He  had  a  force  of  four  hundred  men  with  him, 
and  this  is  a  truly  formidable  company  of  depen- 
dents. He  has  begun  to  live  by  the  sword;  and, 
being  associated  by  marriage  with  Hittites  and 
Ishmaelites,  he  has  become  a  powerful  sheik. 
What  was  his  purpose  in  thus  approaching  Jacob? 
Perhaps  he  generally  travelled  with  a  large  escort ; 
perhaps  he  is  not  openly  hostile  to  his  brother, 
but  is  just  in  that  state  of  mind  when  a  slight  word 
or  act  may  inflame  his  wrath. 

Jacob  approaches  him  with  marked  respect  and 
deference ;  his  instructions  to  the  messengers  are 
conciliatory  in  the  extreme.  He  does  not  avail 
himself  of  the  honor  of  precedency  as  given  in 
the  paternal  blessing,  but  he  calls  Esau  his  lord 
and  speaks  of  himself  as  "  thy  servant. "  He  takes 
great  pains  to  suggest — ^a  very  important  matter, 
doubtless,  to  both — that  he  does  not  come  in  pov- 
erty asking  help,  but  in  wealth,  and  so  is  able  to 
bestow  favors.  He  wishes  Esau  to  know  that  he 
has  not  come  to  claim  "the  double  portion,"  and 
this  statement  would  certainly  tend  greatly  to 
conciliate  Esau.  Doubtless  it  was  a  time  of  great 
anxiety  to  Jacob ;  we  are  told  that  he  was  "  dis- 
tressed," yctzcr^  straitened — this  term  implies  that 


2  6o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  distress  of  Jacob  was  very  real;  and,  without 
doubt,  God  intended  thereby  to  quicken  His  ser- 
vant's fervency  in  pra3^er,  and  to  lead  him  to  cast 
himself  unreservedly  upon  divine  help.  We  now 
see  Jacob  exercising-  the  utmost  precaution  as  he 
divides  his  flecks,  herds,  and  camels  into  two 
bands ;  he  has  determined  to  prepare  himself  for 
the  worst  while  he  trusts  for  the  best.  If  Esau 
should  smite  one  band  the  other  may  escape  by 
flight.  We  ought  not  to  blame  him  for  taking 
these  precautions;  we  ought  not  to  say  that  he 
ought  to  trust  God  without  adopting  wise  meas- 
ures to  help  himself.  His  prudence  was  as  com- 
mendable as  it  was  considerable ;  and  he  can  the 
more  truly  trust  God  after  he  has  wisely  helped 
himself.  We  see  also  that  he  manifested  the  ut- 
most skill  by  placing  spaces  between  the  droves 
of  cattle.  He  would  thus  make  the  number  ap- 
pear as  large  as  possible,  as  do  the  adroit  man- 
agers of  political  processions  in  our  ovvU  day.  He 
wished  Esau  properly  to  estimate  the  value  of  the 
gift.  The  announcement  of  the  gift  to  Esau  and 
the  expressions  of  his  regard  for  his  brother  are 
repeated  in  the  most  artful  manner  possible.  It 
is  asserted  that  Jacob  is  Esau's  servant,  and  "be- 
hold thy  servant  Jacob  is  behind  us."  Jacob 
makes  sure  that  nothing  shall  be  neglected  which 
shall  appease  Esau.  Truly  Jacob  was  a  Hebrew 
of  rare  wisdom,  skill,  and  foresight.  These  quali- 
ties would  give  him  great  success  to-day  in 
America;    he  would   doubtless    take    high    rank 


lVI/0    JVAS    THE    WRESTLER    W'f  TIF  JACOB ?     261 

among  his  fellow  Hebrews  amid  the  exciting  com- 
petitions of  our  day.  Our  thoughts  turn  for  the 
moment  from  Jacob  thus  making  careful  prepara- 
tion, to  his  open-hearted  brotlier  approaching 
him  with  his  large  escort.  Probably  Esau  had  an 
almost  pardonable  vanity  in  showing  Jacob  how 
powerful  he  had  become ;  possibly,  also,  he  wished 
to  protect  him  from  danger  on  the  journey.  Esau 
was  always  dashing,  startling,  and  chivalrous. 
There  was  a  decidedly  spectacular,  and  a  some- 
what Napoleonic,  element  in  his  character,  an 
element  wr.ich  almost,  in  spite  of  our  better  judg- 
ment, wins  our  undue  admiration.  This  is  the 
picture  of  the  two  brothers.  One  is  planning  on 
the  banks  of  the  Jabbok  to  appease  his  brother, 
while  that  brother  approaches  him  with  a  power- 
ful company  of  retainers. 

Prayer  Following  Effort. 

Jacob  now  prays  as  well  as  plans  for  deliver- 
ance. He  not  only  uses  all  his  own  skill,  but  he 
seeks  help  from  God.  We  have  here  really  a  re- 
markably fine  model  for  a  special  prayer  to  God ; 
this  is  one  of  the  best,  as  it  is  one  of  the  most  an- 
cient, intercessions  with  God  which  we  have  in 
the  Bible.  This  successful  prayer  deserves  par- 
ticular notice.  Jacob  approaches  God  pleading  his 
promises  for  the  protection  of  his  people.  He  lays 
hold  of  God's  faithfulness  as  a  God  in  covenant 
with  his  people ;  and  thus  he  appeals  to  God  as  his 
own  God  in  covenant  with  Abraham  and  Isaac.    He 


262  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

also  lays  claim  to  personal  mercies  and  promises. 
Most  beautifully  also  does  he  manifest  a  spirit  of 
deep  humility  and  self-abasement;  the  prayer  is 
literally  steeped  in  humility ;  and  yet  it  is  as  urgent 
as  it  is  humble.  He  does  not  forget  in  his  pleas 
for  deliverance  his  own  un worthiness  and  God's 
greatness  and  holiness.  It  would  be  difficult  to 
emphasize  unduly  the  excellence  of  the  spirit 
which  he  here  manifests.  He  frankly  confesses 
his  sin  and  invokes  God's  mercy  as  an  unmerited 
boon  while  he  prostrates  himself  in  the  dust  at 
God's  feet;  then  he  earnestly  prays  for  deliver- 
ance, making  tender  reference  to  "the  mother 
with  the  children."  He  identifies  himself  thus 
with  the  entire  company,  as  he  was  its  leader  and 
head.  He  then  pleads  God's  promise  that  He 
would  grant  him  prosperity  and  crown  him  with 
blessing.  We  have  often  thought  of  Jacob,  as  he 
has  been  perhaps  unkindly  called,  as  "  the  father 
of  Jewish  guile";  that  element,  doubtless,  was  in 
his  nature,  but  we  ought  not  to  forget  that  he  was 
a  faithful  lover  and  a  tender  father,  and  that  he  is 
now  to  rise  to  be  a  majestic  man  of  faith,  and  to 
have  his  name  written  with  honor  upon  the  im- 
perishable pages  of  sacred  story.  Thankfulness 
was  one  of  the  striking  characteristics  of  his  faith 
and  his  prayer.  He  traced  all  his  success  to 
God's  loving  care  and  gracious  providence.  We 
thus  see  him  alone  engaged  in  communion  with 
God  on  the  bank  of  the  Jabbok. 


WHO    IV AS    THE    WRESTLER    WITH  JACOB?    263 

The  Mysterious  Wrestler. 

Jacob  is  thus  alone,  as  all  the  others  of  nis  com- 
pany have  passed  over.  We  now  approach  the 
crisis  of  the  crisis  in  his  life.  God  has  marvellous 
honors  in  store  for  him,  and  he  must  bs  prepared 
for  their  reception.  He  is  to  have  a  new  name 
and  a  new  nature ;  he  is  to  be  made  worthy  of  his 
great  place  in  the  Kingdom  of  God.  He  has 
hitherto  been  a  very  unsaintly  saint;  but  he  is 
now  entering  upon  a  new  life  and  a  new  conse- 
cration to  God.  Old  things  are  passing  away  and 
all  things  are  becoming  new.  Hitherto  he  has 
been  self-reliant,  self-righteous,  self-seeking;  thus 
he  bargained  and  plotted  for  the  birthright ;  thus 
he  bargained  with  God  at  Bethel ;  thus  he  higgled 
with  Laban,  cheating  and  being  cheated.  Just  at 
this  crisis,  when,  perhaps,  he  had  passed  over  the 
ford  and  was  seeking  a  little  rest,  a  strange  Being 
wrestles  with  him.  The  word  wrestled,  ycabck^ 
a  term  occurring  only  here,  is  perhaps  derived 
from  abak^  dust.  It  is  supposed  by  some  authori- 
ties to  be  applied  to  wrestling  because  of  the  dust 
which  was  excited  by  the  exertions  of  the  wres- 
tlers. The  combatants  in  the  Grecian  games  were 
glad  literally  to  raise  the  dust,  because  thereby 
they  could  grasp  more  firmly  the  naked  bodies  of 
their  opponents,  which  were  besmeared  with  oil. 
Jacob  is  still  true  to  his  old  nature,  which  has  not 
yet  fully  passed  away;  he  will  fight  it  out  on  the 
line  of  self-confidence  if  it  take  all  night  to  reach 


264  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

a  conclusion.  He  has  been  a  taker-by-the-heel,  a 
supplanter,  all  through  his  life;  and,  true  to  his 
character,  he  closes  in  with  this  great  Unknown. 
But  this  mysterious  One  touches  the  socket  of  his 
hip-joint,  and  immediately  it  is  wrenched  out  of 
joint.  The  thigh  is  the  pillar  of  the  wrestler's 
strength,  and  now  Jacob  is  absolutely  helpless,  he 
can  only  hang  in  his  helplessness  on  his  con- 
queror, and  thus  he  will  sweetly  learn  that  when 
he  is  weak  he  is  strong.  He  clings  to  his  con- 
queror and  begs  for  a  blessing.  His  action  at  this 
point  is  profoundly  suggestive  in  its  spiritual  in- 
struction. Jacob  is  in  the  mighty  hand  of  his 
almighty  Vanquisher,  who  will  overthrow  the 
self -trustful  Jacob,  but  who  will  not  deny  the 
prayer  of  the  helpless  and  trustful  supplicant. 
We  know  from  other  Scripture,  Hosea  xii.  4,  that 
he  wept  and  made  supplication,  throwing  himself 
in  importunate  prayer  upon  the  mercy  of  God. 

Who  was  this  mysterious  wrestler?  He  does 
not  give  his  name  to  Jacob,  but  he  changes 
Jacob's  name  to  Israel.  In  the  passage  before  us 
the  mysterious  One  is  termed  a  man,  but  in 
Hosea  xii.  4  he  is  called  "  the  Angel" ;  this  refer- 
ence clearly  shows  us  that  he  was  not  a  human 
antagonist.  In  verse  30  he  is  virtually  called  God 
in  connection  with  the  name  of  the  place  Peniel. 
Thus  he  who  is  at  one  time  called  "  a  man"  and 
"  the  Angel"  is  afterward  designated  by  the  august 
title  of  God.  There  is  not  the  slightest  doubt  but 
that  this  mysterious  wrestler  was  none  other  than 


lVI/0    iVAS    THE    WRESTLER    WITH  JACOB?     265 

the  Ang-el  of  the  Covenant,  none  other  than  the 
Son  of  God,  none  other  than  Jesus  the  Christ. 
No  longer  is  the  patriarch  to  be  Jacob  the  sup- 
planter,  but  Israel,  a  prince  and  a  prevailer  with 
God.  Jacob  is  no  match  in  a  contest  with  God  as 
a  wrestler,  but  as  a  suppliant  he  prevailed.  The 
new  name  and  the  new  nature  go  together.  Jacob 
needed  both,  and  Jacob  now  received  both.  He 
has  now  learned  that  the  contest  with  Esau  was 
nothing,  but  the  contest  with  Jehovah  was  every- 
thing. Hitherto  he  had  been  a  clever  and  perti- 
nacious man ;  henceforth  he  is  to  be  the  humble 
suppliant,  the  devout  believer,  and  the  faithful 
servant.  The  transaction  was  profoundly  real  in 
Jacob's  experience,  and  was  symbolic  of  Jacob's 
past,  present,  and  future. 

The  Face  of  God. 

The  word  Pcnicl  means  "the  face  of  God." 
Jacob  so  named  the  place  because  he  had  seen 
God  face  to  face,  "  rait  hi  EloJiini  panirn  el  paiiiin" 
("I  have  seen  the  Elohim  faces  to  faces"),  had 
seen  him  fully  and  completely,  and  still  lived. 
He  carried  ever  after  the  marks  of  this  conflict, 
for  we  are  told  that  "he  halted  upon  his  thigh." 
When  the  Apostle  Paul,  in  the  abundance  of  his 
revelations,  was  exalted  to  the  third  heaven,  he 
received  a  thorn  in  the  flesh  to  humble  him ;  so 
Jacob  received,  perhaps,  in  the  sciatic  nerve,  "  the 
tendo  Achillis  of  the  Greeks,"  a  token  for  a  like 
purpose  which  he  should  carry  with  him  to  his 


2  66  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEEICULTIES. 

grave.  The  Jews  to  this  day  abstain  religiously 
from  eating  of  the  sinew  which  shrank,  or  became 
feeble,  a  custom  which  is  a  monument  to  the  his- 
torical truth  of  this  remarkable  event  in  the  life 
of  Jacob. 

All. true  Christians  have  their  remarkable  spir- 
itual experiences.  The  artist  has  his  times  of 
glowing  enthusiasm  and  of  almost  superhuman 
inspiration,  historians  and  artists  love  to  visit 
places  historic  in  their  respective  departments  of 
genius.  The  man  of  letters  lingers  with  fondest 
enthusiasm  on  moments  of  history  and  art  in  the 
world's  great  historic  and  artistic  capitals.  The 
Christian  has  his  Bethlehems  and  Gethsemxanes 
and  Olivets.  All  along  life's  pathway  he  has  his 
Peniels,  times  and  places  when  the  glory  of  God 
shines  upon  him  and  the  peace  of  God  fills  his 
soul.  Peniel  may  be  found  in  secret  prayer,  in 
sacred  communion,  in  the  study  of  the  Bible,  or 
in  the  assembly  of  God's  people.  Happy  are  they 
who  know  these  experiences  which  are  foretastes 
of  heaven  itself.  We  may  yet  see  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ  and  thus  find  our  true  life.  He 
who  walked  in  the  garden  in  the  cool  of  the  day, 
who  guided  Noah,  who  visited  Abraham,  who 
delivered  Lot,  came  finally  as  the  Son  of  Man  to 
dwell  with  men.  The  same  mysterious  One  pro- 
nounced the  word  "  Mary,"  as  this  devoted  w^oman 
wept  at  His  sepulchre.  It  was  He  who  walked 
with  the  two  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus. 
It  is  He  who  walks  and  talks  with  His  children  to 


WHO    ]]\4S    THE    WRESTLER    WHTH  JACOB?     267 

this  blessed  hour.  It  is  well  for  us  when  we  re- 
ceive some  wonderful  honor  from  God,  to  receive 
also  some  memento  of  humility  lest  we  be  unduly 
elated  by  our  spiritual  exaltation.  As  men  heard 
Jacob's  new  name  and  saw  his  lameness  they 
would  be  reminded  of  the  spiritual  honor  which 
he  had  received.  May  our  humility  ever  testify 
to  the  reality  of  our  communion  with  a  risen  and 
exalted  Christ! 

Great  trials  are  necessary  to  the  purification  of 
our  faith.  But  for  Jacob's  utter  helplessness  he 
had  never  become  the  prevailer  with  God.  When 
trials  are  sanctified  they  are  the  richest  proofs 
of  God's  fatherly  love.  Let  us  not  hesitate  to 
go  into  the  furnace,  if  only  the  Son  of  God  go 
with  us. 

He  who  prevails  with  God  can  never  be  over- 
come by  men.  Success  in  life  must  depend,  as 
its  deepest  source,  upon  the  favor  of  God.  What 
is  the  mightiest  power  of  our  adversaries  com- 
pared with  the  almighty  power  of  our  God?  The 
might  and  the  wisdom  of  man  are  weakness  and 
foolishness  with  God.  Christ's  real  triumph  was 
in  Gethsemane ;  our  greatest  triumphs  are  to  be 
in  our  closets.  If  we  be  victorious  there,  men  will 
not  be  victorious  over  us  in  the  public  walks  of  life. 
We  pray  too  little.  Let  us  wrestle  in  fervent 
prayer  with  God  and  we  shall  never  be  vanquished 
by  men.  The  man  who  fears  God  so  much  that 
he  has  no  fear  of  men  will  triumph  over  every  foe. 
If  we  be  wrestling  Jacobs  we  shall  become  pre- 


2  6S  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

vaiiing  Israels.  Never  was  a  more  glorious  night 
than  that  of  Jacob's  on  the  bank  of  Jabbok.  As 
the  morning  dawns  the  unknown  wrestler  disap- 
pears and  the  triumph  of  Jacob  is  complete. 
Esau,  as  the  impulsive  hunter,  passes  away.  But 
Jacob,  purified  by  trial  and  cleansed  by  grace, 
transformed  from  the  supplanter  into  the  prince 
of  God,  still  stands  before  the  world  crowned  with 
glory  and  honor.  Let  us  not  be  weary  in  our  sup- 
plications. Upon  us,  as  upon  him,  the  Sun  of 
righteousness  will  rise  with  healing  in  his  beams 
and  undimmed  glory  in  His  rays,  and  we,  too, 
shall  be  transformed  from  supplanting  Jacobs  into 
prevailing  Israels. 


XVI. 

DID  GOD  OR  PHARAOH  HARDEN  PHARAOH'S 
HEART  ? 


XVI. 

DID  GOD  OR  PHARAOH  HARDEN 
PHARAOH'S  HEART? 

Few  subjects  in  biblical  interpretation  have 
given  rise  to  greater  controversies  and  more  con- 
flicting opinions  than  the  hardening  of  Pharaoh's 
heart.  This  subject  has  greatly  perplexed  the  de- 
voutest  believers,  and  it  has  given  infidels  of 
every  class  supposed  materials  for  criticism  of 
God  and  His  holy  Word,  If  we  understand  the 
subject  rightly,  we  shall  clearly  see  that  neither 
God  nor  his  Word  needs  apology  on  the  part  of 
any  class  of  believers.  This  discourse  is  in  no 
technical  sense  a  theodicy;  theodicean  allevia- 
tions of  this  difficult  narrative  are  not  really 
necessary  if  only  our  interpretation  be  correct,  if 
only  it  be  truly  biblical.  If  professional  inter- 
preters and  all  readers  would  only  look  at  the  en- 
tire narrative  concerning  the  hardening  of  Pha- 
raoh's heart  in  the  light  of  common  sense,  of  daily 
experience  and  observation,  and  especially  in  the 
light  of  a  fair  interpretation,  instead  of  through 
the  medium  of  traditional  conceptions  and  un- 
authoritative creeds,  they  would  have  no  difficulty 
in  discovering  the  truth  without  any  intermixture 
of  error.      Such  an  interpretation  of  God's  Word 


272  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

will  clearly  show  that  God  was  no  more  respon- 
sible for  the  hardening  of  Pharaoh's  heart  than  He 
is  to-day  for  the  hardening  of  the  hearts  of  all 
men  who  shut  their  eyes  to  the  light  of  His  Word, 
and  who  sear  their  consciences  against  the  influ- 
ence of  His  Spirit. 

It  will  be  readily  admitted  that  there  are  things 
hard  to  understand  in  the  statements  made  con- 
cerning Pharaoh ;  there  are  also  facts  difficult  of 
explanation  in  every  man's  resistance  to  the 
claims  of  God  upon  his  mind  and  heart.  Unfor- 
tunately, the  Scripture  narrative  respecting  the 
Egyptian  king  has  been  so  interpreted  as  to  cause 
many  to  stumble  thereat,  and  others  to  become 
fierce  opponents  of  God's  wa}^  and  Word.  But  it 
is  absolutely  certain  that  a  correct  understanding 
of  the  narrative  will  greatly  lessen  the  inherent 
difficulties  of  the  case,  and  will  bring  God's  treat- 
ment of  this  proud  and  stubborn  king  into  line 
with  the  laws  which  govern  men  to-day  in  their 
rejection  of  truth,  and  in  their  refusal  to  do  justly 
toward  God  and  men,  and  into  line  also  with  the 
natural  and  inevitable  effect  of  such  conduct  on 
their  hearts  and  wills.  In  speaking  of  the  harden- 
ing of  Pharaoh's  heart,  the  Bible  simply  states 
facts  and  suggests  processes  which  we  are  daily 
witnessing  among  men  now,  as  in  the  case  of 
Pharaoh  in  that  ancient  day  and  remote  land.  A 
careful  study  of  the  texts  in  which  reference  is 
made  to  the  hardening  of  Pharaoh's  heart  will 
show  that  there  was  no  other  influence  at  work 


DID   GOD   HARDEN  DHARAOir S  HEART?     273 

than  that  which  proceeded  from  his  own  deter- 
mination not  to  lose  the  services  of  the  Israelites 
by  obeying-  God  in  letting  them  go,  as  God 
through  Moses  had  commanded;  and  that  there 
was  no  other  control  over  his  heart  than  the  action 
of  laws  still  operant  on  the  hearts  of  men  who  re- 
fuse to  obey  God,  and  whose  hearts  become  hard- 
ened by  the  rejection  of  the  Holy  Spirit  even  to 
this  hour.  We  are  still  taught  to  command  men 
not  to  refuse  to  hear  God's  voice ;  and  we  are  still 
taught  that  by  refusing  to  obey  they  harden  their 
hearts  as  truly  as  Pharaoh  hardened  his. 

Prophecy  of  the  Hardening. 

When  we  turn  to  Exodus  iv.  21,  we  learn  that 
before  Moses  had  returned  to  Egypt  God  had  de- 
clared of  Pharaoh,  "  I  will  harden  his  heart,  that 
he  shall  not  let  the  people  go."  At  first  blush 
these  words  surprise  us,  and  suggest  that  God,  by 
an  act  of  a:^bitrary  and  sovereign  power,  had 
made  it  impossible  for  Pharaoh  to  obey  the  divine 
command  given  by  Moses.  We  must,  however, 
remember  the  purpose  for  which  this  statement 
was  made  to  Moses.  It  was  needful  that  he 
should  be  strongly  impressed  with  God's  provi- 
dence in  all  the  events  which  were  to  occur ;  thus 
the  result  in  regard  to  Pharaoh  is  stated  at  the 
outset  for  the  encouragement  of  Moses.  This 
statement  was  not  so  much  causative  as  it  was 
predictive.     This  statement  of  God  resulted  from 

His  omniscience,  He  thereby  knowing  what  would 
18 


2  74  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

be  true  in  regard  to  Pharaoh,  rather  than  from 
God's  omnipotence,  he  thereby  being  able  to 
cause  this  result  to  be  true.  The  purpose  of  the 
statement  was  to  prepare  Moses  for  the  final  re- 
sult lest  he  should  become  discouraged  upon  a 
first  and  second  failure,  and  should  renounce  the 
solemn  mission  upon  which  he  had  been  sent  by 
God.  He  is  prepared  for  Pharaoh's  repeated  re- 
fusals, and  for  the  dread  ultimatum  which  finally 
he  will  announce  to  Pharaoh.  Moses  is  to  under- 
stand that  the  heart  of  Pharaoh  and  of  all  kings  is 
in  the  hand  of  the  Almighty  who  sent  him  upon 
this  mission. 

It  is  important  at  this  point  that  we  should  care- 
fully observe  that  the  Bible,  in  speaking  of  the 
hardening  of  Pharaoh's  heart,  employs  in  the 
Hebrew  original  three  distinct  words  differing 
in  meaning  from  one  another,  but  which,  unfor- 
tunately, are  all  in  the  common  version  of  the 
Scriptures  indiscriminately  rendered  "  hardened." 
It  may  be  permitted,  even  in  a  popular  discourse, 
to  explain  the  diversity  of  the  import  of  these 
words.  In  Exodus  iv.  21,  the  passage  already 
quoted,  we  have  the  expression  cJuizzck  etJi  libbo, 
"  I  will  strengthen  his  heart."  The  Hebrew  word 
Jiazak,  which  our  version  translates  harden,  liter- 
ally signifies  to  strengthen,  confirm,  embolden, 
make  courageous ;  it  is  translated  by  such  words 
as  to  excite  to  duty,  to  be  strong,  to  persevere. 
It  is  placed  by  Hebrew  compilers  at  the  end  of 
some   of   the  books    in    the    Bible    to    encourage 


DID   GOD   HARDEN  PHARAOirS  HEART?    275 

readers  to  proceed  with  their  study  of  the  sacred 
writings,  and  to  render  the  obedience  which  they 
require.  It  is  a  part  of  the  exhortation  of  God  to 
Joshua,  Joshua  i.  7,  rak  c/iarjak,  "  only  be  thou 
strong-."  It  is  also  found  in  Joshua's  dying  ex- 
hortation to  the  people  (xxiii.  6)  vc-chazaktcin, 
"be  ye  therefore  very  courageous,"  etc.  No  one 
would  think  of  translating  the  original  in  these 
cases  by  the  word  "harden";  perhaps,  indeed,  the 
word  ''hardy"  would  not  be  inappropriate  to  the 
meaning  of  the  passage  before  us  and  its  context. 
If  we  carried  over  this  meaning  to  God's  words  to 
Moses  concerning  Pharaoh  in  the  passage  under 
consideration,  the  thought  would  simply  be,  "  I 
will  make  Pharaoh's  heart  daring,  presumptuous, 
hardy";  the  principle  which  acts  in  harmony  with 
God's  holy  law,  and  which  is  rightly  termed  cour- 
ageous, becomes  presumptuous,  dangerous,  and 
defiant  when  it  is  opposed  to  God's  will  as  revealed 
in  His  Word.  Another  one  of  the  three  words 
which  is  used  to  describe  the  condition  of  Phara- 
oh's heart  is  kabad,  this  means  "to  make  heavy" ; 
and  the  third  word  is  kasJiaJi^  meaning  "  to  make 
hard"  in  the  sense  of  difficult,  intractable,  immov- 
able, stiff,  or  rigid.  We  thus  see  that  these  three 
original  words  differ  considerably  from  one  an- 
other in  their  primary  significance.  When,  for 
the  second  time,  God  says  (Exodus  vii.  3),  "  I  will 
harden  Pharaoh's  heart,"  the  announcement  was 
made  to  Moses  just  before  the  beginning  of  the 
ten   plagues.       Moses   is  thus   informed  that  the 


276  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

course  which  God  would  pursue  with  regard  to 
Pharaoh  would  harden,  and  not  soften,  his  heart, 
would  simply  make  him  more  obstinate  in  his  re  - 
fusal  that  Israel  should  not  go.  The  result  of  this 
process  on  the  part  of  Pharaoh  would  make  it 
necessary  that  Moses  should  make  before  the 
Egyptians  still  greater  exhibitions  of  the  divine 
might  and  majesty.  The  purpose  of  this  an- 
notmcement  to  Moses,  as  before,  was  to  assure 
him  that  in  assuming  these  enormously  difficult 
tasks  God  was  with  him,  and  would  overrule  all 
things  for  the  deliverance  of  his  people.  In  these 
statements  regarding  the  process  of  petrification 
of  the  heart  of  Pharaoh  the  statement  by  God  is 
again  predictive  rather  than  causative.  The  whole 
purpose,  at  this  point,  is  to  strengthen  the  faith, 
quiet  the  fears,  and  multiply  the  hopes  of  Moses 
by  the  assurance  of  God's  presence  in  the  vast 
undertaking  commanded  by  God  and  assumed  by 
Moses.  When  God  is  spoken  of  as  hardening  the 
heart  of  Pharaoh,  the  language  simply  implies 
that  without  the  exertion  of  any  positive  divine 
influence  Pharaoh  should  so  treat  God's  command 
as  inevitably,  by  the  operation  of  perfectly  natural 
laws,  to  confirm,  to  strengthen,  and  to  harden 
himself  in  his  opposition  to  God.  Instead  of  be- 
ing humbled  by  the  wonderful  displays  of  divine 
power,  he  should  be,  by  his  resistance  of  light  and 
by  his  wilful  opposition  to  truth,  the  more  de- 
termined in  his  opposition  to  the  mandate  of 
Jehovah.      God  is  said  to   have  done  this   simply 


DID    GOD   HARDEN  PHARAOir S  HEART?    277 

because  He  permitted  it ;  in  no  other  sense  can  it 
be  said  that  He  was  the  author  of  this  hardening. 
In  some  sense,  as  Augustine  long  ago  suggested, 
God  may  be  said  to  harden  those  whom  He  re- 
fuses to  soften.  If  men  will  not  walk  in  the  light 
that  God  gives  them,  they  become  blind ;  if  they 
will  not  listen  to  God's  call,  they  repel  God. 
Nowhere  does  God,  by  an  exercise  of  arbitrary 
power,  make  it  impossible  for  men  to  see  the 
light,  to  walk  in  the  truth,  and  to  believe  the 
right.  When  men  grieve  God's  spirit,  that  spirit 
withdraws  from  them,  and  they  are  thus  left  to 
the  consequence  of  their  own  wilful  and  sinful 
act.  In  Deut.  ii.  30,  language  is  applied  to  Sihon, 
King  of  Heshbon,  similar  to  that  here  used  with 
reference  to  Pharaoh,  and  in  both  cases  we  have 
simply  the  statement  of  the  result  of  the  disobedi- 
ence of  these  two  men  to  the  plain  commands  of 
God.  In  Joshua  xi.  20,  like  terms  are  employed 
of  the  enemies  of  God.  They  had  sinned  against 
the  light  they  had  received,  and  God  justly  left 
them  to  the  pride  and  obstinacy  of  their  own 
wicked  hearts.  They  chose  to  retain  their  idol- 
atry, and  God  permitted  them  to  be  destroyed. 
Similar  sad  experiences  are  being  enacted  in  the 
history  of  every  congregation,  and  in  the  lives 
of  thousands  of  men  to  this  very  hour.  We 
have  in  the  Bible  the  statement  of  the  operation 
of  these  laws ;  we  have  all  around  us  to-day  the 
operation  of  these  laws,  and  if  we  had  its  inspired 
history,    the   language    of   tlic     Bil^le    regarding 


278         OLD    TESTAMENTS  DIFFICULTIES, 

Pharaoh  would  be  repeated  to-day  regarding 
tens  of  thousands  who  hear  and  who  reject  the 
gospel  of  salvation.  In  the  Bible  we  have  a  flash 
from  the  X-ray  of  divine  truth;  that  truth  is  still 
operant,  but  we  do  not  see  its  processes.  Any 
one  who  will  take  the  pains  to  examine  the  use  of 
these  Hebrew  words  in  other  parts  of  the  Bible 
will  see  that  they  are  employed  with  different 
shades  of  meaning,  as  suggested  in  this  discourse ; 
and  he  will  see  that  there  is  a  solemn  personal 
danger  which  still  warrants  the  solemn  exhorta- 
tion of  the  Psalmist  (Ps.  xcv.  8),  "  Harden  not 
your  heart."  This  hardening  is  here  spoken  of 
as  a  voltmtary  act  on  the  part  of  those  who  reject 
God's  Word,  an  act  for  which  certainly  God  can- 
not be  responsible,  except  He  should  deprive  men 
of  the  freedom  which  is  the  inalienable  right  and 
great  glory  of  manhood. 

Pharaoh's  Responsibility. 

Attention  frequently  has  been  called  to  the  fact 
that  while  in  the  narrative  in  Exodus  the  harden- 
ing of  Pharaoh's  heart  is  ten  times  ascribed,  in 
the  sense  now  explained,  to  the  Lord,  it  is  also 
several  times  ascribed  to  Pharaoh  himself  (Exodus 
viii.  15,  32;  ix.  34);  it  is  also  several  times  stated 
that  his  heart  was  hardened,  without  naming  the 
author  of  the  process.  We  can  readily  see  that 
the  fact  when  ascribed  to  God,  and  then  to  Pha- 
raoh, is  so  ascribed  in  different  senses  of  the  word, 
so  that  there  is  no  contradiction  between  the  two 


DID  GOD  HARDEN  PIlARAOir S  HEART?     279 

assertions.  It  can  be  ascribed  to  (iod  only  in  one 
of  two  senses:  first,  in  that  He  permits  it  to  occur; 
or,  second,  in  the  sense  tliat  lie  is  the  Designer, 
Creator,  and  Supreme  Governor  of  the  entire  uni- 
verse, and  that  the  acts  of  all  His  creatures  may,  in 
some  sense,  be  carried  back  to  Him,  either  as  per- 
mitting- or  causing  their  occurrence.  In  the  early 
day  God  was  so  constantly  thought  of  as  present 
and  active  in  the  government  of  the  world  and  the 
control  of  men  that  it  was  natural  to  refer  to  Him 
as  the  author  of  all  events  of  whatever  kind.  But 
in  no  respect  was  God  the  author  of  Pharaoh's 
sin ;  in  no  respect  is  He  the  author  of  the  sins  of 
men  to-day.  God  does  not  interfere  with  the 
freedom  with  which  men  are  endowed ;  if  He  did 
so  interfere  there  could  be,  on  the  part  of  men, 
neither  right  nor  wrong,  neither  virtue  nor  vice, 
neither  personal  sinfulness  nor  holiness.  It  is  un- 
fortunte  that  in  our  common  version  only  the 
word  "  harden"  is  used  to  translate  the  three  dif- 
ferent Hebrew  terms  now  given  and  explained ; 
had  their  various  shades  of  meaning  been  prop- 
erly expressed  in  English  many  of  the  difficulties 
which  have  arisen  would  be  unknown.  The  same 
three  terms  are  used  when  the  hardening  is  as- 
cribed to  God  as  when  it  is  ascribed  to  Pharaoh, 
or  when  its  author  is  not  distinctly  stated. 

The  Progress  of  the  Hardening. 
Pharaoh  resisted   the    reasonable    demands    of 
Moses  for  the  deliverance  of  the  people,  notwith- 


28o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

standing  all  the  wonderful  signs  which  Moses  had 
given  him.  The  hand  of  God  became  more  and 
more  clearly  revealed ;  finally  Pharaoh  confessed 
his  wrong.  His  magicians  could,  in  a  measure, 
convert  the  rod  into  a  serpent;  still  they  must 
have  felt  Aaron's  superiority  as  his  rod  swallowed 
up  their  rods.  Before  the  ten  plagues  the  heart 
of  Pharaoh  was  hardened ;  and  after  each  of  the 
first  five  plagues  the  hardening  is  expressly  attrib- 
uted to  Pharaoh  himself,  or  is  named  without 
specifying  the  author  (vii.  22;  viii.  15,  19,  32;  ix. 
7).  After  the  sixth  plague,  Pharaoh  still  resist- 
ing, we  read  for  the  first  time  (ix.  1 2)  that  "  The 
Lord  hardened  the  heart  of  Pharaoh."  This 
word  really  means  that  "  the  Lord  made  firm  the 
heart  of  Pharaoh ;  the  Hebrew  is  yeJiazzck.  Space 
for  repentance  was  then  given  Pharaoh,  for  after 
the  seventh  plague  we  read  (ix.  34)  that  Pharaoh 
"  made  heavy  his  heart. "  The  third  plague  utterly 
overmatched  the  skill  of  Pharaoh's  magicians; 
they  owned  their  powerlessness,  and  confessed 
the  presence  of  the  finger  of  God.  After  the  fifth 
plague  Pharaoh  discovered  that  not  one  of  the 
cattle  of  the  Israelites  was  dead.  This  difference 
between  the  Israelites  and  Egyptians  ought  to 
have  removed  Pharaoh's  last  doubt.  It  did  pro- 
duce a  marked  impression  on  the  minds  of  some 
of  the  Egyptians,  and  when  the  seventh  plague 
was  announced,  they  took  steps  to  protect  their 
cattle  against  the  predicted  storm  of  hail  and  fire. 
After   this   plague    Pharaoh   owned   his  sin,   ac- 


DID  GOD  HA  RDEN  PIIA  RA  Oil '  S  I  IE  A  K  T^     281 

kno\vlcd*4cd  the  ri^i^htcoiisncss  of  Ood  and  Uic 
wickedness  of  himself  and  liis  people  (ix.  27)  ;  but 
when  the  severity  of  the  plai^ue  was  over  he  hard- 
ened his  heart  again  (ix.  35).  The  sun  of  pros- 
perity once  more  shone  forth  ;  and,  as  the  natural 
sun  hardens  the  clay  that  had  been  saturated  by 
rain,  so  Pharaoh's  heart  was  hardened  by  the  re- 
moval of  the  plag-ue  and  the  occurrence  of  the 
respite.  He  was  thus  preparing  himself  and  his 
people  for  the  final  catastrophe.  He  was,  by  his 
own  vohmtary,  deliberate,  personal,  and  wicked 
acts,  fitting  his  heart  for  the  judicial  and  divine 
hardening  as  the  natural  and  inevitable  result  of 
the  laws  of  freedom  with  which  he  and  we  are 
endowed.  The  progress  of  evil  in  the  human  soul 
is  one  of  the  most  solemn  facts  in  human  exist- 
ence. Men  who  will  not  use  their  limbs  will  one 
day  find  that  they  are  virtually  unusable;  men 
who  will  not  exercise  their  memories  practically 
lose  their  memories ;  men  who  will  not  speak  and 
pray  in  religious  services  will  largely  lose  the 
power  of  speech  and  prayer.  A  species  of  eyeless 
fish  is  found  in  dark  caves;  having  no  use  for 
eyes,  they  soon  have  no  eyes  to  use.  These  are 
tremendously  solemn  realities  in  the  experiences 
of  men  to-day  as  well  as  in  the  judicial  judgment 
on  Pharaoh.  These  great  moral  laws  sweep 
through  the  universe;  they  are  irresistible  as 
gravitation  and  universal  as  God.  No  one  can  es- 
cape their  operation.  If  we  come  into  line  with 
them,    they  will  help  us  in  the  development  of 


282  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

character  for  useful  lives  on  earth  and  for  admis- 
sion into  heaven;  if  we  oppose  them,  they  will,  by 
all  the  might  of  infinity,  utterly  destroy  us. 

Human    Disobedience    and    Divine    Hardening. 

Let  us  bear  in  mind  that  the  words  referring  to 
God's  agency  in  the  process  of  Pharaoh's  harden- 
ing were  for  the  encouragement  of  Moses,  and 
that  the  words  referring  to  his  own  action  show 
his  determination  to  resist  God.  The  wonders 
and  signs  performed  by  God  through  Moses  acting 
on  a  better  man  with  a  better  heart  would  have 
secured  obedience;  but  acting  on  Pharaoh  with 
his  haughty  heart,  cruel  nature,  and  mistaken  no- 
tions of  political  economy,  simply  produced  hard- 
ness and  rebellion  amounting  to  moral  insanity. 
But  for  his  sullen  obstinacy,  his  determined  dis- 
obedience, and  his  wilful  blindness,  his  heart  had 
never  been  hardened;  the  responsibility  of  this 
hardness,  therefore,  rests  with  him,  and  not  with 
God.  The  same  sun  hardens  clay  and  softens 
wax.  Do  we  blame  the  sun  because  the  clay  is 
hardened?  The  differences  between  the  two  re- 
sults in  the  clay  and  the  wax  are  due  to  the  dif- 
ferences between  the  two  substances,  and  not  to 
the  sun,  although  it  apparently  produced  these 
opposite  effects.  God's  providences  were  by 
Pharaoh's  disobedience  the  occasion  of  his  hard- 
ening ;  but  his  own  stubborn  will  and  wicked  heart 
were  the  cause  of  his  hardening.  God  did  not 
purpose  the  hardening,  in  the  sense  of  causing  it ; 


DID  GOD  HA  RDEN  PHA  RA  OH '  S   HE  A  K  T?     283 

God  permitted  it,  in  the  sense  of  letting  natural 
forces  and  wholesome  laws  bring  about  their  usual 
and  inevitable  result.  God  uniformly  performs 
good;  God  may  occasionally  permit  evil.  Men 
may,  in  the  exercise  of  their  God-given  freedom, 
so  misuse  God's  good  gifts  that  they  result  in  evil, 
and  not  in  good,  so  far  as  the  will  of  man  is  con- 
cerned. 

Let  us  thus  clearly  understand  that  God's 
announcement  to  Moses  of  the  hardening  of 
Pharaoh's  heart  was  not  causative,  but  simply 
predictive.  The  fulfillment  of  the  prediction  was 
suspended  to  give  Pharaoh  an  opportunity  to  turn 
to  God  in  penitence,  and  to  the  enslaved  people  in 
justice.  We  have  seen  that  five  plagues  occurred, 
and  still  Pharaoh  resisted  all  these  remarkable 
proofs  of  the  divine  presence  and  power;  and  not 
until  then  was  the  divine  prediction  against  him 
fulfilled.  God  restrained  His  punishment  until 
the  cup  of  Pharaoh's  guilt  was  full.  Pharaoh 
hardened  his  own  heart  in  determined  sin  before 
God  hardened  it  in  righteous  punishment.  Pha- 
raoh was  by  his  own  will  an  obstinate,  impenitent, 
and  abominable  sinner,  before  God  by  His  sover- 
eign permission  allowed  him  to  be  judicially,  in 
harmony  with  the  law  of  his  own  conduct,  a 
doomed  reprobate. 

Practical  Applications. 

These  great  truths  have  their  practical  applica- 
tions  in   the   lives   of   men   to-day.      The    Bible 


284  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

simply  declared  the  process  of  hardening  in  the 
heart  of  Pharaoh ;  but  a  similar  process  is  taking 
place  to-day  in  the  hearts  of  thousands  who  listen 
to  the  gospel  of  Christ.  If  God  should  fully  write 
the  history  of  many  in  our  congregations,  it  could 
be  said  of  them,  as  truly  as  of  Pharaoh,  that  they 
hardened  their  own  hearts  in  their  guilt,  and  that 
God  permitted  this  hardening  in  their  guilt,  and 
also  that  God  permitted  this  hardening  in  punish- 
ment for  their  wicked  unbelief.  We  know  that 
in  the  exercise  of  their  freedom  men  now  resist, 
despise,  and  oppose  God ;  out  of  this  conscious,  ob- 
stinate, and  determined  resistance  comes  hardness 
of  heart.  The  moment  a  man  knowingly  and  will- 
ingly disobeys  God,  that  moment  the  process  of 
hardening  begins.  God's  calls  are  numerous, 
tender,  and  varied.  As  truly  as  did  Pharaoh 
harden  his  heart,  so  do  men  harden  their  hearts 
at  this  hour.  Their  act  is  voluntary ;  it  is  charge- 
able to  themselves,  and  not  to  God.  In  God's 
name  you  are  exhorted  to-day,  "  harden  not  5^our 
hearts  as  in  the  provocation." 

The  Gospel  never  leaves  men  as  it  finds  them ; 
it  must  either  harden  or  soften.  It  must  either 
be  a  savor  of  life  unto  life,  or  of  death  unto 
death ;  and  the  savor  which  is  life  to  one,  or  death 
to  another,  is  according  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  Gopsel  is  received.  It  is  never  the  intention 
of  God  that  the  Gospel  should  bring  death ;  but, 
like  every  blessing  which  is  rejected  or  perverted, 
it  works  the  greater  evil  when  rejected.      Pha- 


DID  GOD  HARDEN  PHARAOH'S  HEART?     285 

raoh's  heart  was  once  relatively  susceptible;  then 
he  rejected  and  opposed  God,  and  so  his  heart  be- 
came a  stone  in  his  bosom.  The  Bible  tells  us 
that  God  hardened  it,  and  it  also  tells  us  that  he 
hardened  it  himself;  and  both  statements  are 
true  in  the  senses  already  explained.  When  we 
neglect  light  and  knowledge,  they  add  to  our  con- 
demnation. Men  may  to-day  pass  over  into  the 
power  of  Satan  as  truly  as  Pharaoh  was  in  his 
grasp. 

We  do  not  so  much  need  greater  proofs  of  God's 
will  as  we  need  greater  willingness  to  obey  His 
will.  Men  do  not  need  greater  light  so  much  as 
they  need  better  eyes ;  the  light  may  be  strong 
enough  wellnigh  to  scorch  their  eyes,  and  yet 
they  pretend  that  they  do  not  see  the  path  of 
duty.  The  most  astounding  miracles  could  not 
subdue  Pharaoh's  heart.  Christ  could  not  con- 
vince men  who  would  close  their  eyes  to  His  mir- 
acles and  their  ears  to  Plis  words.  He  assured  us 
that  some  men  would  not  believe,  though  a 
preacher  to  them  rose  from  the  dead.  The  his- 
toric Lazarus  rose  from  the  dead,  and  some  strove 
to  put  him  to  death.  Christ  rose  from  the  dead, 
but  some  men  to-day  are  so  hardened  in  heart 
that  they  will  not  believe  Him. 

God  will  assuredly  in  the  end  come  off  victori- 
ous. Resistance  to  Him  will  end  in  our  utter  de- 
feat. Each  pleading  invitation  rejected  will  add 
to  our  guilt ;  each  gentle  admonition  refused  will 
increase  our  insensibility.     The  Apostle  Paul  tells 


286  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

US  of  certain  persons  who  were  "past  feeling." 
Open  your  hearts  to-day  to  listen  to  God's  call, 
lest  the  time  may  come  when  God  will  say,  "  Be- 
cause I  have  called,  and  ye  refused;  I  have 
stretched  out  my  hand,  and  no  man  regarded" ; 
"I  also  will  laugh  at  your  calamity;  I  will  mock 
when  your  fear  cometh."  God  forbid  that  it 
should  be  said  of  any  who  hear  or  read  these 
words :  "  Then  shall  they  call  upon  me,  but  I  will 
not  answer;  they  shall  seek  me  early,  but  they 
shall  not  find  me :  for  that  they  hated  knowledge, 
and  did  not  choose  the  fear  of  the  Lord." 


XVII. 

WAS    THE    PASSAGE    OF   THE    RED   SEA 
SUPERNATURAL  ? 


XVII. 

WAS   THE    PASSAGE    OF    THE    RED 
SEA    SUPERNATURAL? 

This  is  an  interesting  and  practical  question; 
it  has  its  relations  to  the  wonderful  events  which 
mark  the  deliverance  of  Israel  from  the  bondage 
of  Egypt.  The  fourteenth  chapter  of  Exodus 
records  the  miraculous  passage  of  Israel  through 
the  Red  Sea.  By  remarkable  signs  God  attested 
the  commission  of  Moses  to  Pharaoh.  The  num- 
ber of  these  signs  was  ten,  expressive  of  their 
completeness.  The  hour  was  now  near  when  de- 
liverance for  Israel  should  come.  God  was  not 
deaf  to  the  cry  of  the  oppressed  which  went  up  to 
His  ear.  Brave  and  wise  leaders  were  needed ; 
and  the  heroic  Moses  and  the  eloquent  Aaron  are 
the  men  for  the  hour.  When  the  tale  of  bricks 
was  doubled,  then  came  Moses.  When  the  knell 
of  liberty  seemed  about  to  ring,  then  the  song  of 
hope  sounded  forth.  If  Moses  and  Aaron  shall 
fail  in  reaching  the  heart  of  Pharaoh,  the  Al- 
mighty One,  whose  name  is  Jehovah,  shall  make 
him  hear. 
19 


290  OLD    TESTA  MEN  T  DIFFIC  UL  TIE  S. 

The  Deliverance. 

Probably  the  Pharaoh  of  the  exodus  was  Men- 
ephtah  I.,  the  son  and  successor  of  Rameses  II. 
This  Rameses  was  called  by  the  Greeks  Sesostris ; 
he  was  the  most  famous  of  all  the  Pharaohs,  being 
a  mighty  conqueror  in  Africa,  Asia,  and  Europe. 
His  statues  and  temples  are  found  throughout  the 
Nile  valley,  from  Zoan  to  Nubia.  His  mummy 
was  found  in  1881,  in  a  rock  chamber  on  the  west 
bank  of  the  Nile,  near  Thebes,  and  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  Boulak  Museum  at  Cairo.  His  son, 
Menephtah  L,  appears  to  have  been  inglorious, 
and  to  have  died  without  finishing  his  father's 
tomb.  With  him  probably  Moses  was  familiarly 
associated  in  childhood  within  the  palace.  It 
must  have  been  a  startling  experience  to  be 
authoritatively  addressed  by  the  friend  of  his  boy- 
hood, now  the  leader  of  the  captive  people,  and 
the  representative  of  Jehovah.  But  a  greater 
than  Moses  is  here ;  the  Almighty  is  the  leader  of 
this  deliverance.  Moses  knew,  and  Pharaoh  was 
soon  to  learn,  the  truth  of  which  Lowell  has  sung : 

"Right  forever  on  the   scaffold,  Wrong   forever   on   the 

throne — 
Yet  that  scaffold  sways  the  future,  and.  behind  the  dim 

unknown, 
Standeth  God  within  the  shadow,  keeping  watch  above 

His  own." 

God  has  now  made  bare  His  arm  for  the  deliver- 
ence  of  His  chosen,  and  no  power  of  Egypt  can 


THE  PASSAGE  OE  THE  RED  SEA.  291 

resist  the  onward  march  of  the  Almighty.  The 
plagues  followed  each  other  in  quick  succession ; 
then  came  the  last  terrible  night.  Jehovah  passed 
through  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the  midnight 
echoed  with  the  loud  wail  of  a  nation's  woe.  The 
gods  of  Egypt,  one  by  one,  were  utterly  over- 
whelmed, and  Jehovah  is  triumphant.  The  king 
seeks  Moses  and  Aaron,  and  the  people  cry  out  in 
their  bitter  grief  that  he  should  permit  Israel  to  go. 
Finally,  Pharaoh  says  "  Go" ;  and  the  great  exodus 
is  begun.  Egypt's  slaves  have  become  men  and 
w^omen ;  a  nation  is  born  in  a  night.  The  journey 
to  Canaan  is  begun,  and  Jehovah  goes  before  His 
people.  The  pillar  of  cloud  and  of  fire  was  more 
to  Israel  than  was  the  brazier  of  the  great  Alex- 
ander to  Greece.  For  a  time  all  went  well,  for 
water  and  food  were  abundant,  and  the  hearts  of 
the  people  beat  high  with  patriotic  hope.  But 
Israel  had  many  lessons  to  learn — lessons  as  to  the 
value  of  liberty  and  the  necessity  of  righteousness 
to  the  preservation  of  liberty.  These  are  lessons 
which  we  have  not  fully  learned  even  to  this  hour. 
The  people  journey  onward  to  Etham,  on  the 
edge  of  the  wilderness.  Should  they  continue 
their  journey  in  that  direction,  they  would  pass 
immediately  into  the  wilderness,  and  Pharaoh, 
pursuing  them,  would  soon  overtake  and  recapture 
the  imperfectly  armed  fugitives.  The  Lord  would 
not  conduct  them  by  the  straight  road  into  the 
land  of  promise  lest  the  appearance  of  war  should 
discourage  them;  still  less  might  he  carry  them 


292  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

into  the  wilderness,  where  they  might  be  readily- 
overtaken  and  entirely  overcome  by  well-dis- 
ciplined soldiers.  The  order  is  therefore  given 
to  change  the  line  of  march,  and  soon  they  are 
encamped  before  Pi-hahiroth,  the  last  encamp- 
ment before  crossing  the  Red  Sea.  They  are  be- 
tween Migdol  and  the  sea.  Perhaps  it  is  impos- 
sible, after  the  local  changes  of  more  than  three 
thousand  years,  to  determine  these  sites.  Baal- 
ze-phon  was  over  against  Pi-hahiroth.  Thus  the 
Israelites  had  mountains  on  the  west  and  south, 
and  sea  on  the  east. 

Pharaoh  repented  of  his  leniency  in  having  let 
them  go.  The  wound  in  his  heart  is  healing,  and 
the  old  Satanic  spirit  is  returning.  When  sick,  he 
would  be  an  angel;  when  well,  he  was  a  devil. 
He  believed  that  the  fugitives  were  entangled  in 
the  land  and  shut  in  by  the  wilderness.  God  has 
already  been  honored  by  His  victory  over  Pha- 
raoh, and  His  glory  will  be  still  more  signally  dis- 
played. We  now  have  an  account  of  the  pursuit 
of  Pharaoh;  the  third  day  has  now  arrived,  and 
pride,  ambition,  and  revenge  fill  Pharaoh's  soul. 
Orders  for  instant  preparation  are  given,  and 
soon  six  hundred  chosen  chariots,  belonging  to 
the  state,  are  pursuing  Israel  in  hot  haste.  The 
pride  and  chivalry  of  Egypt  are  in  Pharaoh's 
army ;  his  knights  are  men-at-arms  ready  for  any 
chivalrous  and  heroic  service.  Finely  bred  horses 
drew  his  war-chariots,  and  in  each  chariot  was  a 
warrior  and  a  charioteer.     The  days  of  mourning 


THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  RED  SEA.  293 

over  the  dead  first-born  added  to  the  fierceness  of 
the  attack  on  Israel.  Terrible  was  the  situation 
of  Israel  at  this  moment.  The  sight  of  the  well- 
appointed  soldiers  of  Pharaoh  filled  them  with 
alarm.  They  forgot  the  wonderful  interposition 
by  which  they  had  escaped  thus  far ;  for  the  sight 
of  their  former  masters  amid  the  splendor  and 
pomp  of  chariots  and  horses  caused  their  hearts  to 
fail  with  fear.  On  the  west  and  south  mountains 
frowned ;  on  the  east  rolled  the  sea,  and  yonder 
on  the  north  the  war  chariots  of  Egypt,  with 
apparently  resistless  might,  were  approaching. 
Though  comparatively  few  in  number,  these 
horsemen  and  chariots  had  conquered  mighty 
foes,  and  had  given  Egypt  glorious  victories. 
Shame  on  Israel's  cowardice  in  the  presence  of 
Egypt's  chivalry!  Shame  on  Israel's  meanness 
toward  the  heroic  Moses!  The  prolonged  period 
of  slavery  had  robbed  them  of  bravery.  In  the 
agony  of  their  distress  they  charged  Moses  with 
having  brought  them  into  the  wilderness  to  die. 
This  is  the  treatment  which  this  heroic  and  per- 
plexed leader  receives  from  the  cowards  whom  he 
is  striving  to  rescue.  This  is  evermore  the  fate 
of  noble-hearted  souls,  who  strive  to  lift  the  down- 
trodden into  fuller  light,  larger  liberty,  and  nobler 
manhood.  Never  was  cynicism  more  cynical; 
never  cowardice  more  cowardly.  Slavery  made 
these  Israelites  cravens ;  it  transformed  men  into 
soulless  things.  The  heart  of  Moses  must  have 
been  touched  to  the  quick  with  their  cowardice ; 


294  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

from  some  part  of  the  great  host  there  ought  to 
have  been  heard  this  brave  voice : 

"Though  love  repine  and  reason  chafe. 
There  came  a  voice  without  reply, 
'Tis  man's  perdition  to  be  safe. 
When  for  the  truth  he  ought  to  die." 

These  men  knew  but  little  of  the  infinite  re- 
sources of  the  Almighty !  Though  hemmed  in  on 
every  earthly  side,  one  way  was  opened  to  Moses — 
the  way  upward  to  God's  throne  and  heart.  Moses 
is  strong  in  faith.  He  assures  the  people  that  they 
shall  see  their  enemy  no  more  forever.  He  affirms 
that  Jehovah  shall  fight  for  His  own.  Only  God 
could  deliver  a  defenceless  people  from  an  armed 
and  infuriated  foe.  God's  voice  comes  to  Moses, 
"  Whycriest  thou  unto  me?"  Then  the  command 
is  given  to  stretch  the  rod  out  over  the  sea  and 
divide  it.  God  gives  the  assurance  that  again  the 
heart  of  Mizraim  shall  be  hardened,  and  that  the 
people  shall  know  that  the  Lord  is  God.  We  be- 
hold the  cloud  between  the  camp  of  Israel  and  the 
camp  of  Mizraim,  light  to  one  and  darkness  to  the 
other.  Now  we  behold  Moses  stretching  his  hand 
over  the  sea.  A  strong  east,  or  northeast,  wind 
blows  all  that  night,  and  behold !  the  waters  are  di- 
vided, and  the  sea  is  made  dry  land.  Thus  the 
waves  rolled  back,  and  thus  Israel  marched  for- 
ward. In  dashed  the  pursuing  Egyptians ;  their 
hosts  are  soon  in  the  midst  of  the  waters.  We  are 
told  in  language  of  mysterious  majesty,  that  "  the 


THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  RED  SEA.  295 

Lord  looked"  in  the  morning  watch  into  the  host 
of  Egypt.  It  was  a  marvellous  moment.  Other 
Scripture  clearly  teaches  that  a  storm  burst  upon 
the  sea,  that  flash  after  flash  of  lightning  shot 
through  the  midnight  darkness,  and  peal  after 
peal  of  thunder  rolled  over  the  heads  of  the  be- 
wildered Egyptians.  Their  chariot  wheels  are 
removed,  and,  as  the  morning  dawns,  the  hand  of 
Moses  is  stretched  once  more  over  the  sea.  The 
waves  roll  backward.  The  chariots  and  horse- 
men, and  all  the  army  of  Pharaoh  sank  like  lead 
in  the  midst  of  the  sea.  Glorious  was  this  display 
of  almighty  power.  At  one  fell  sweep  the  chiv- 
alry of  Egypt  is  laid  low.  Soon  the  dead  are  cast 
upon  the  shore  of  the  sea,  and  the  song  of  Moses, 
one  of  the  most  triumphant  paeans  ever  heard  by 
human  ears — more  glorious  than  the  Marseillaise 
of  France,  the  "  Ein'  feste  Burg  ist  unser  Gott" 
of  Germany,  the  noblest  songs  of  Puritanism  in 
England,  and  the  most  patriotic  hymns  of 
America — is  sublimely  chanted,  with  the  music  of 
the  stormy  sea  as  its  divine  accompaniment. 

The  Red  Sea. 

This  is  the  substance  of  the  miraculous  story 
told  by  the  inspired  penman.  In  order  more  fully 
to  understand  it,  a  few  facts  regarding  the  Red 
Sea  may  appropriately  be  given.  The  Red  Sea 
is  known  by  various  names.  Sometimes  it  is 
called  simply  the  Sea;  sometimes  the  Sea  of 
Suph,    and  sometimes   the    Egyptian    Sea.     The 


296  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Egyptians  called  it  the  Sea  of  Punt,  that  is,  of 
Arabia;  its  Arabic  name  is  Bahr-el-Hedjaz,  from 
a  province  on  its  eastern  coast,  or  Bahr-el-Ahmar, 
meaning  "  the  red."  The  Erythrean,  or  Red  Sea, 
was  the  Greek  and  Roman  name.  The  word 
Erythrean  means  the  same  in  Greek  that  Edom 
does  in  Phoenician  and  Hebrew.  Suph  denotes 
the  wool-like  seaweed  found  on  its  shores.  The 
name  "  Red"  Sea  probably  is  from  Edom,  its 
northeast  part  having  washed  the  country  pos- 
sessed by  the  Edomites,  or  from  the  color  of  its 
corals,  or  possibly  from  the  red  zoophytes  found 
at  times  floating  on  its  surface.  But  the  better 
opinion  is  that  which  gives  the  name  "  Red"  from 
the  pink  colors  found  at  times  on  the  mountains 
on  the  shores;  but  the  best  explanation  of  the 
name  is  that  which  finds  it  in  the  word  Edom, 
which  means  red.  The  Greeks  borrowed  the 
name  from  the  Phoenicians.  The  name  Edom 
was  taken  for  an  appellative  instead  of  a  proper 
name,  hence  the  name  Red  Sea  to  this  day.  The 
sea  is  a  beautiful  green  or  blue.  The  Black  Sea 
is  not  black,  the  Blue  Danube  is  not  blue,  the 
Yellow  Sea  is  not  yellow,  and  the  Red  Sea  is  not 
red.  It  is  really  an  arm  of  the  Indian  Ocean.  On 
the  east  is  Arabia,  and  on  the  west  is  Egypt.  The 
straits  of  Bab-el-Mandeb,  or  Gate  of  Tears,  con- 
nect it  with  the  Indian  Ocean.  This  writer  will 
never  forget  the  scorching  heat  which  he  experi- 
enced when  he  sailed  over  this  historic  sea.  Since 
November,  1869,   the  Suez  Canal  has  connected 


THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  RED  SEA.  297 

it  with  the  Mediterranean.  The  sea  is  about 
fourteen  hundred  and  fifty  miles  long,  with  an 
average  width  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  miles. 
The  north  end  divides  into  the  Gulf  of  Suez  on 
the  west,  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  on  the  east ;  and  be- 
tween these  two  bodies  of  water  lies  the  peninsula 
of  Mount  Sinai.  There  is  no  doubt  but  that  the 
sea  was  anciently  connected  with  the  Nile  by  a 
canal  used  by  the  Pharaohs,  fifteen  centuries  be- 
fore Christ.  .Recently  this  canal  was  restored, 
and  it  is  now  the  Sweet-water  canal,  giving  water 
to  the  stations  between  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
Red  Sea,  and  causing  fertility  in  many  parts  of 
the  country  which  otherwise  would  be  deserts. 
The  sea  is  difficult  of  navigation  because  of  sub- 
merged coral  reefs ;  it  receives  no  rivers,  but  many 
rain  torrents. 

The  Natural  and  the  Supernatural. 

There  is  no  doubt  but  that  in  the  time  of  Moses 
the  sea  extended  at  least  fifty  miles  farther  north 
than  to-day.  It  is  believed  that  this  change  has 
taken  place  within  the  historic  period.  If  so, 
this  is  a  fulfilment  of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  xi. 
15;  xix.  5:  "The  Lord  shall  utterly  destroy  the 
tongue  of  the  Egyptian  sea,"  etc.  Probably  the 
"Lake  of  the  Crocodile,"  the  Birket-el-timsah, 
indicates  the  old  bed. 

Where  did  the  Israelites  cross  the  Red  Sea? 
This  is  a  perplexing  question.  We  follow  them 
from  Rameses  to  Succoth,  then  to  Etham,  "  in  the 


298  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

edge  of  the  wilderness."  Probably  each  place  of 
encampment  marked  the  close  of  a  day's  journey. 
The  last  camping-place  was  Pi-hahiroth.  But 
w^here  was  that?  Probably  it  was  the  name  of  a 
natural  locality,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  near 
the  sea.  How  far  was  the  passage  of  the  sea 
natural,  and  how  far  supernatural?  It  is  quite 
certain  that  the  ten  plagues,  or  at  least  several 
of  them,  were  just  what  might  have  been  ex- 
pected in  Egypt.  It  is  equally  certain,  also,  that 
the  order  in  which  they  occurred  is  the  normal 
order  in  which  the  natural  phenomena  would 
operate.  Thus  the  corruption  of  the  river  was 
naturally  followed  by  the  plague  of  frogs;  and 
thus,  from  the  dead  frogs,  gnats  and  flies  were 
bred,  and  from  these  painful  and  poisonous  in- 
sects came,  in  turn,  murrain  among  the  cattle 
and  boils  among  the  people.  These  plagues,  in 
kind  though  not  in  degree,  are  actually  experi- 
enced to  this  day  in  Egypt.  Travellers  there  even 
now,  when  a  southwest  wind  is  blowing,  observe 
swarms  of  locusts,  and  in  the  spring  of  the  year 
they  are  known  to  come  w4th  an  east  wind.  Le- 
pisus  speaks  of  a  "regular  snowdrift  of  locusts." 
He  also  says  "  that  they  fell  down  in  showers,  and 
this  continued  for  six  days."  Even  during  the 
last  few  years,  great  storms  of  hail  have  occurred 
in  Egypt,  and  thousands  of  cattle  have  been  car- 
ried off  by  murrain.  It  was,  therefore,  to  be  ex- 
pected that  God  would  use  material  immediately 
at  hand  for  the  punishing  of  the  Egyptians.      The 


THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  RED  SEA.  299 

natural  element  was  in  the  presence  of  common 
plagues  among  the  people ;  the  supernatural  ele- 
ment was  in  the  extent,  fierceness,  and  succession 
of  these  plagues  for  the  accomplishment  of  God's 
purpose  in  humbling  the  heart  of  Pharaoh  and 
breaking  the  power  of  Egypt. 

The  inspired  narrative  teaches  us  that  there 
was  a  like  commingling  of  the  natural  and  the 
supernatural  in  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea. 
Travellers  and  scholars  of  many  centuries  and 
countries  have  given  their  best  thought  to  this 
great  event.  Strabo,  Josephus,  Diodorus,  Nie- 
buhr,  Stanley,  Robinson,  Professor  Palmer,  Sir 
J.  W.  Dawson,  and  many  others,  have  carefully 
studied  every  spot  in  the  entire  neighborhood, 
and  every  scrap  of  information  on  this  important 
subject.  But  they  contradict  one  another  as  to 
the  place  of  the  passage.  Sir  J.  W.  Dawson  many 
of  us  are  accustomed  to  follow  with  great  readi- 
ness and  satisfaction,  but  it  is  difficult  to  be  sure 
regarding  the  authority  which  we  should  follow 
touching  these  much  debated  historic  conclusions. 
There  is  no  doubt,  as  already  suggested,  that  the 
waters  of  the  Red  Sea  once  occupied  a  much 
larger  area  than  at  present.  There  is  no  doubt 
but  that  a  strong  east  or  northeast  wind  would 
produce  a  great  effect  upon  the  ebb  and  flood 
tides.  The  Seventy  has  south  wind  instead  of 
east  wind;  the  Bible  word  is  not  definite,  for 
kadini  may  refer  to  any  rough  wind ;  the  term  is 
generic  rather  than  specific.      The  statement  that 


300  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  place  of  passage  must  have  been  broad,  as 
the  whole  Egyptian  army  perished,  is  not  well 
founded.  The  force  employed  against  the  Israel- 
ites was  not  large.  There  were  only  six  hundred 
chariots,  each  carrying  two  men.  This  was  prob- 
ably only  the  advance  guard  of  a  much  larger 
army  which  later  would  join  these  chariots.  We 
do  not  know  how  many  chariots  went  abreast.  It 
is  difficult,  indeed  it  is  impossible,  to  calculate  the 
space  which  would  have  been  taken  by  the  Israel- 
ite multitudes.  No  doubt  Moses  calculated  these 
details  with  the  utmost  care.  He  was  as  wise  as 
he  was  brave,  and  as  practical  as  he  was  prayer- 
ful. To  this  hour  the  wind  often  drives  out  the 
water  from  parts  of  the  Red  Sea ;  islets  thus  ap- 
pear, which  look  like  huge  stepping-stones;  and 
so,  at  the  head  of  the  arms  of  the  sea  sandbanks 
and  fords  are  found,  which  may  have  literally 
been  trodden  by  the  escaping  Hebrews.  Diodorus 
says  that  at  times  "  the  whole  bay  at  the  head  of 
the  sea  was  laid  bare."  Doubtless  Moses,  like 
the  skilled  leader  he  was,  like  the  man  who  was 
master  of  the  learning  of  the  Egyptians,  includ- 
ing geometry,  surveying  and  hydraulics,  and  with 
a  knowledge  of  the  tides,  took  advantage  of  that 
knowledge  at  this  critical  hour.  He  would  have 
been  unworthy  of  his  great  responsibility  had  he 
not  done  so.  Even  though  the  whole  event  may 
have  been  in  due  course  of  nature,  we  must  still 
see  that  God's  will  and  purpose  were  thereby 
accomplished.     All  the  processes  of  nature,  ordi- 


THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  RED  SEA.  3°! 

nary  and  extraordinary,  are  under  God's  control. 
There  is  areg-ion  in  which  in  God's  thought  there 
is  no  distinction  between  natural  and  superna- 
tural; we  make  such  distinctions,  but  to  God  all 
is  natural,  and  all  is  supernatural.  We  have  seen 
that  in  all  the  miracles  in  Egypt  there  was  a  union 
of  the  natural  and  supernatural.  This  was  not 
otherwise  in  the  miracles  of  our  Lord.  He  took 
advantage  of  the  water  when  He  made  wine ;  He 
availed  Himself  of  the  loaves  and  fishes  in  the 
hands  of  a  boy  when  He  performed  a  miracle  to 
feed  hungry  thousands.  Doubtless  this  is  God's 
usual  method.  In  the  Bible  the. spiritual  is  the 
antithesis  to  the  natural;  the  word  supernatural 
is  a  human  rather  than  a  divine  word. 

By  admitting,  nay,  by  insisting  on,  the  pres- 
ence of  the  natural  in  this  passage  of  the  Red  Sea, 
in  harmony  with  the  distinct  statement  of  the  in- 
spired historian  regarding  the  strong  wand  that 
blew  that  night,  we  are  very  far  from  rejecting 
the  miraculous  element  in  the  great  event.  All 
the  resources  of  the  universe  are  God's.  It  was 
He  who  caused  the  wnnd  to  blow;  it  w^as  He  who 
made  the  sea  roll  back  in  obedience  to  His  wall. 
The  use  of  a  natural  wind  gives  additional  honor 
to  God  in  this  event. 

His  power  and  purpose  are  seen  in  that  the 
wind  blew  at  the  right  time  and  in  the  right  di- 
rection to  deliver  the  Israelites,  and  to  destroy 
the  Egyptians.  If  we  reject  the  miraculous  ele- 
ment in  this  marvellous  event,  how  shall  we  ac- 


302  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

count  for  the  shallower  waters  for  Israel,  and  the 
deeper  waters  for  Egypt?  We  affirm  with  undi- 
minished emphasis  our  faith  in  the  reality  of  this 
miracle,  and  our  increasing  honor  to  God  because 
of  His  ability  to  use  natural  forces  at  the-  right 
time,  and  with  the  necessary  volume,  and  under 
the  appropriate  control  for  the  accomplishment  of 
His  divine  purposes.  If  the  crossing  took  place 
near  Suez — as  probably,  notwithstanding  all  that 
has  been  said  in  favor  of  other  localities,  it  did — 
the  strong  wind  acting  on  the  ebb  tide  could  drive 
the  waters  from  the  arm  of  the  sea  near  Suez,  and 
possibly  even  from  the  end  of  the  gulf.  Thus  the 
shallower  parts  would  become  dry,  while,  as  Dr. 
Edward  Robinson  has  suggested,  the  northern 
part  of  the  arm  would  still  remain  in  its  normal 
condition.  The  waters  would  thus  be  divided, 
and  so  would  be  a  wall — in  the  sense  of  being  a 
barrier — to  the  Israelites  on  the  right  hand  and 
on  the  left.  The  miracle  was  thus  natural  as  to 
the  means  employed,  and  supernatural  as  to  the 
application  of  these  means  for  a  divine  and  glori- 
ous end.  Recent  surveys  clearly  show  that  the 
narrator  must  have  traversed  the  country,  and 
have  been  an  eye-witness  of  the  events  which  he 
thus  records.  The  narrative  seems  to  have  been 
a  daily  journal. 

Paul  refers  to  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  as  a 
type  of  baptism,  as  it  marked  the  beginning  of  a 
new  era  in  the  life  of  the  Israelites.  It  was  the 
crisis  of  the  exodus ;  no  event  comparable  to  it  is 


THE  PASSAGE  OE  THE  RED  SEA.  303 

found  in  all  the  pages  of  that  divine  history.  It 
gave  inspiration  to  the  genius  of  the  psalmist,  and 
the  song  of  Moses  on  the  Arabian  shore  is  the 
prelude  to  that  more  triumphant  piean,  which 
shall  be  chanted  by  the  redeemed,  standing  on  the 
sea  of  glass,  having  the  harps  of  God  and  singing 
the  song  of  Moses  and  the  Lamb.  There  is  no 
difficulty  in  life  too  great  for  God.  If  we  move 
forward  in  the  performance  of  duty,  every  form 
of  opposition  will  disappear,  every  foe  will  be 
overthrown,  and  victory  from  the  hand  of  God 
shall  assuredly  be  ours. 


I 


XVIII. 

WHAT  WERE    THE    SYMBOLS    CALLED    THE 
URIM  AND  THUMMIM? 


so 


XVIII. 

WHAT    WERE    THE     SYMBOLS    CALLED 
THE    URIiM    AND   THUMMIM? 

What  were  the  Urim  and  Thummim?  It 
would  not  be  easy  to  ask  a  question  to  which  a 
conclusive  reply  is  more  difficult.  It  has  been 
suggested  by  some  writers  on  this  subject  that 
as  the  Jewish  exiles  on  their  return  from  Babylon 
postponed  the  settlement  of  a  difficulty  till  there 
should  rise  up  "  a  priest  with  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim," so  we  may  not  be  able  to  answer  this  ques- 
tion until  a  priest  comes  with  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim to  give  us  the  answer  as  to  what  both  were. 
Many  learned  scholars  of  different  countries  and 
centuries  frankly  confess  that  they  do  not  know 
what  these  symbols  were ;  and  some  declare  that, 
in  their  judgment,  it  is  impossible  ever  to  know, 
and  that  God  probably  meant  that  this  discovery 
should  never  be  made. 

But  no  earnest  student  of  the  Bible  can  ever 
be  satisfied  to  pass  the  subject  over  in  silence  as 
the  result  either  of  indifference  or  cowardice ;  we 
are  under  solemn  obligation  to  learn  all  which  the 
Bible,    rightly  interpreted,  can   teach    us.       Both 


3o«  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

nature  and  revelation  are  constantly  giving  up 
knowledge  which  had  remained  quite  mysterious 
or  utterly  unknown  for  ages.  We  must  modestly 
and  reverently  strive  to  master  every  kind  of 
knowledge  which  our  minds  are  capable  of  receiv- 
ing, and  which  the  divine  storehouse  contains  for 
our  instruction.  Out  of  this  treasury  are  to  come 
things  old  and  new.  It  is,  of  course,  frankly  ad- 
mitted that  all  kinds  of  knowledge  are  not  of 
equal  importance.  What  is  necessary  to  our 
knowledge  of  salvation  in  Christ  is  simple ;  what 
is  essential  to  our  growth  in  grace  is  compara- 
tively plain.  But,  while  thankfully  and  joyfully 
partaking  of  the  sincere  milk  and  also  of  the 
strong  meat  of  the  Word,  we  may  profitably  at- 
tempt to  understand  some  of  the  things  in  differ- 
ent parts  of  the  Bible  which  the  Apostle  Peter, 
referring  to  parts  of  the  writings  of  his  brother 
Paul,  describes  as  "  things  hard  to  be  understood. " 
But  in  so  doing  we  shall  not  forget  the  plainer 
and  weightier  matters  of  the  law.  Matriculates 
in  Christ's  school  may,  with  the  angels,  desire  to 
look  into  the  profound  mysteries  both  of  redemp- 
tion and  revelation,  and  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
belong  to  this  class  of  mysterious  and  sacred 
things.  Rightly  studied,  we  shall  find  that  even 
this  subject  is  not  without  great  value  to  us  in  our 
practical  and  spiritual  lives ;  we  shall  clearly  and 
joyously  see  that  these  mysterious  symbols  direct 
us  to  Christ,  who  is  the  world's  true  Light  and 
glorious  Perfection. 


WHAT  WERE   THE    UKIM  AXD   TIJUMMIM?     309 

Vark^us  Theories. 

Various  theories,  as  was  to  be  expected,  have 
been  suggested  in  explanation  of  these  remark- 
able symbols.  Indeed,  the  literature  of  the  sub- 
ject would  make  a  library  of  considerable  dimen- 
sions, for  the  solution  of  the  problems  connected 
with  these  symbols  has  proved  to  be  as  fascinating 
as  it  is  confessedly  difficult.  It  would  be  a  com- 
paratively easy  matter  to  give  a  summary  of  these 
various  hypotheses;  but  it  will  be  more  profitable 
to  follow  a  correct  historical  method,  which  shall 
account  with  reasonable  fulness  for  the  discover- 
able facts  of  Scripture  regarding  these  symbols. 
The  terms  themselves  we  are  able  to  iinderstand 
without  much,  if  any,  doubt.  To  discover  their 
m.eaning  is  a  fair  starting-point  in  our  discussion. 
The  Hebrew  in  Exodus  xxviii.  30  is  Urini  ve-ctJi 
Jiattinuiiiiiu^  the  "  Lights"  and  "  Perfections. "  The 
Greek  version  makes  the  clause  mean,  "  The 
Manifestation  and  the  Truth."  Other  versions 
give  it  as  "  Enlightenings  and  Certainties,"  "  Elu- 
cidations and  Perfections,"  "Illuminations  and 
Certainties,"  the  "Lucid  and  the  Perfect";  the 
Vulgate  gives  it  as  "Doctrine  and  Verity,"  and 
Luther,  in  his  later  translations,  gave  it  as  "  Light 
and  Right." 

Let  us  look  carefully  at  the  Hebrew  terms  in 
their  order.  Hebrew  scholars  are  nearly  unani- 
mous in  making  Urim  the  plural  of  Ur,  light 
or  fire ;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Septuagint  and 


3TO  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

other  versions  give  a  slightly  different  mean- 
ing to  the  word.  The  literal  English  equivalent 
is  "Lights."  Regarding  Thiimmim  there  is  also 
great  unanimity  of  opinion  in  deriving  it  from 
the  Hebrew  word  /<?;;/,  meaning  perfection  or 
completeness.  Some  would  derive  the  word  from 
the  Hebrew  ajncn,  to  be  true,  but  the  majority,  as 
already  stated,  from  the  word  toni,  some  finding 
in  it  the  meaning,  "a  twin,"  they  imagining  that 
the  two  groups  of  gems,  six  on  each  side  of  the 
breastplate,  constituted  the  Urim  and  Thummim. 
The  best  English  equivalents  of  these  Hebrew 
words  would  be,  light  axid  perfection;  fo.r  there  is 
a  traditional  belief  among  the  Jews,  and  a  virtual 
consensus  of  opinion  among  all  scholars,  that  the 
plural  forms  do  not  imply  numerical  plurality. 
This  plural  is  probably  what  is  called  the  pi  urates 
exccllcnticc,  denoting  the  things  or  modes  through 
which  the  oracle  of  God  was  given.  Some  have 
assumed  that  there  is  here  what  the  rhetoricians 
call  a  hendiadys,  making  the  two  words  equivalent 
to  perfect  light;  but,  perhaps,  the  weight  of 
authority  is  in  favor  of  regarding  the  words  as 
referring  to  distinct  things.  This  latter  idea  is 
certainly  suggested  by  the  fact  that  in  Numbers 
xxvii.  2  1,  and  i  Sam.  xxviii.  6,  Urim  is  found 
alone.  And  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  8,  the  usual  order  is 
inverted,  Thummim  being  given  first.  It  is  stated 
that,  with  the  probable  exception  of  Psalm  xvi.  5, 
Thummim  is  never  given  alone.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising that  different  versions  slightly  vary  the 


WHAT  WERE   THE    URIM  AND   THUMMIM?     311 

meaning  of  these  words;  but  the  variations  in 
meaning  are  more  apparent  tlian  reah  In  Scrip- 
ture language  perfection  and  trutli,  and  light  and 
truth  are  practically  identical ;  that  which  is  per- 
fect is  truly  performed,  and  that  which  is  truly 
performed  is  necessarily  perfect.  In  Joshua  xxiv. 
14  we  read:  "Fear  the  Lord  and  serve  him  m 
sincerity  and  in  truth" ;  the  Hebrew  is,  bctiiniDiini 
iibcemctJi.  We  can  see  at  a  glance  that  here  the 
idea  of  our  obscure  phrase  is  not  remote  from  the 
thought  of  this  exhortation.  It  is  also  in  harmony 
with  the  thought  expressed  in  i  John  iii.  18,  "  But 
in  deed  and  in  truth" ;  neither  is  it  far  removed 
from  Psalm  cxix.  130,  "  The  entrance  of  thy  words 
giveth  light."  We  are  also  reminded  of  Psalm 
xliii.  3,  "  vSend  out  thy  light  and  thy  truth."  It  is 
true  that  the  words  Urim  and  Thummim  are  not 
here  found,  but  it  is  perfectly  obvious  that  the 
psalmist  has  in  mind  the  very  thought  which  prob- 
ably these  symbols  set  forth;  and,  indeed,  his 
thought  may  be  literally  an  echo  of  the  high- 
priest's  prayer  when  he  went  before  God  with  the 
Urim  and  Thummim  on  his  heart. 

So.ME  Other  Scripture  References. 

These  wonderful  words  come  before  us  first  in 
Exodus  xxviii.  30.  They  are  introduced  in  the 
account  of  the  high-priest's  a;  parel,  and  they  are 
mentioned  without  a  single  word  of  explanation, 
as  if  they  were  already  quite  familiar  to  the  writer 
and  its  readers.      The  breast-plate  was  a  piece  of 


312  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

embroidery  about  ten  inches  square  and  of  very- 
elaborate  work,  which  the  high-priest  wore  on  his 
breast.  The  front  was  set  with  twelve  precious 
stones,  on  each  of  which  was  engraved  the  name 
of  one  of  the  tribes.  Inside  the  breast-plate,  we 
are  told,  the  Urim  and  Thummim  were  to  be 
placed;  and  they  were  to  be  on  Aaron's  heart 
when  he  went  in  before  the  Lord.  How  we  wish 
that  at  this  point  a  few  words  of  description  and 
explanation  had  been  given,  but  not  a  word  is 
written.  It  certainly  seems  as  if  it  were  assumed 
that  both  Moses  and  the  people  would  understand 
what  was  meant  when  the  symbols  are  named. 
Joshua,  when  he  became  the  successor  of  the 
heroic  lawgiver,  is  commanded  to  stand  before 
Eleazar,  the  priest,  "  who  shall  ask  counsel  for 
him  after  the  judgment  of  Urim,"  and  this  coun- 
sel is  to  determine  the  course  that  Israel  shall 
pursue.  The  Urim  and  Thummim  are  mentioned 
with  the  blessing  of  the  tribe  of  Levi ;  and  they 
are  mentioned  in  the  history  of  the  Judges,  and 
Saul  is  left  in  darkness,  being  answered  "  neither 
by  dreams  nor  by  Urim  nor  by  prophet."  They 
are  referred  to  also  in  other  Scriptures  directly 
or  indirectly.  Some  have  supposed  because  they 
are  introduced  without  any  explanation  that  they 
were  of  supernatural  origin,  and  were  unlike  any- 
thing upon  the  earth.  They  are  thus  suddenly 
brought  to  our  notice  on  the  sacred  page.  So 
far  as  we  can  discover,  no  order  was  given  for 
their  construction ;  and  no  hint  is  given  that  these 


WHAT   WERE   THE    URIM  AND    TIIUMMIM?     313 

na>mes  were  to  be  employed  for  any  of  the  articles 
which  Moses  was  to  make.  This  obscurity  has 
led  many  to  suppose  that  (jod  never  intended  that 
we  should  endeavor  to  solve  this  mystery;  Init 
there  is  no  warrant  for  this  opinion,  any  more 
than  regarding-  a  thousand  things  in  nature  and 
revelation  which  once  were  impenetrably  mysteri- 
ous, but  which  now  are  exhaustively  understood. 

Various  Opinions. 

Were  the  Urim  and  Thummim  the  same  as  the 
Teraphim?  This  theory  would  make  them  noth- 
ing more  than  small  divining  images  put  into  the 
lining  or  the  folds  of  the  breast-plate,  and  which 
miraculously  spoke  with  an  articulate  voice  utter- 
ing the  oracles  of  God.  This  view  distinguishes 
them  from  the  twelve  stones  and  from  each  other, 
and  it  makes  them  to  have  been  placed  in  the 
cJioscn.  It  is  not  impossible  that  there  are  certain 
passages  of  Scripture  which  show  that  the  Tera- 
phim were  used  as  a  substitute  for  the  Urim ;  but 
it  is  almost  certain  that  if  such  were  the  case 
the  substitution  was  the  result  of  conformity  to 
heathen  ideas,  and  was  not  authorized  by  God. 
The  Mosaic  S3^stem  was  intended  carefully  to 
guard  the  people  against  the  danger  of  image 
worship ;  but  such  a  conception  of  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  would  make  them  contribute  directly 
to  the  indorsement  of  heathenism. 

Others  make  the  Urim  and  Thummim  bright 
stones,   perhaps  diamonds,   in  the  form  of  dice. 


314  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

They  suppose  that  a  number  of  them  \vere  carried 
in  the  pocket  of  the  high-priest's  ckosoi,  and  when 
he  wished  for  a  divine  response  they  were  thrown 
on  a  table,  or  on  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  and  as 
they  fell  their  position,  according  to  laws  under- 
stood by  the  priests,  enabled  them  to  discover 
the  answ^er  wdiich  God  intended  to  give.  But 
this  view  robs  the  wdiole  proceeding  of  dignity 
and  propriety,  and  brings  it  into  the  category  of 
the  rules  or  tricks  of  fortune-tellers;  it  is  also 
without  due  Scripture  warrant.  Another  theory 
makes  these  symbols  a  stone  or  plate  placed  in  the 
middle  of  the  ephod  or  within  its  folds,  on  w^hich 
plate  or  stone  the  sacred  name  of  Jehovah  was 
engraved.  By  gazing  on  this  the  priest  became 
capable  of  prophesying  and  listening  to  the  divine 
voice  communicating  the  will  of  God.  This  name 
of  Jehovah  is  the  SJicmJiainviepJiorash  of  the  Jew- 
ish Cabbalists;  this  is  sometimes  called  the 
"  Tetragrammaton,"  or  four-lettered  name  of  God, 
by  the  mystic  virtue  of  which  name  the  priest 
was  enabled  to  pronounce  luminous  and  perfect 
oracles.  This  conceit  is  now  largely  relegated  to 
the  figments  of  the  Talmudical  rabbins,  figments 
as  numerous  as  they  are  childish  and  fantastic. 

Another  view  makes  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
identical  wath  the  twelve  tribal  gems,  and  makes 
the  two  w^ords  equivalent  in  meaning  to,  Perfect 
Illumination.  We  knov/  that  on  these  tw^elve 
stones  the  names  of  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel 
were  engraved,   and  when  the  high-priest   went 


WHAT   WERE   THE    URIM  AND   THUMMTM?     3^5 

before  the  Lord  he  bore  "  the  judgment  of  the 
children  of  Israel  upon  his  heart."  According-  to 
Josephus  and  the  Seventy,  these  jewels  were  the 
twelve  precious  stones  of  the  breast-plate.  This 
theory  supposes  that  they  revealed  God's  purpose 
by  emitting  an  extraordinary  lustre,  or  by  an  ar- 
rangement of  letters  forming  the  divine  response, 
the  letters  necessary  for  that  purpose  being-  dis- 
tinguished from  the  other  letters.  This  theory 
has  various  modifications  in  its  essential  features, 
and  also  in  its  incidental  details.  Some  authori- 
ties would  make  the  letters  bright  when  victory 
was  at  hand,  and  dark  when  disaster  was  near. 
It  is  difficult  to  distinguish  between  the  subor- 
dinate theories  of  different  interpreters  which 
have  for  their  fundamental  basis  this  general  con- 
ception of  the  precious  stones  in  the  breast-plate 
as  the  Urim  and  Thummim.  Probably  these 
jewels  still  exist  somewhere  as  symbols  of  the 
eternity  and  fidelity  of  God.  It  would  be  fascina- 
tingly interesting  and  equally  instructive  if  they 
should  some  day  be  discovered  and  the  mystery  of 
centuries  resolved.  Some  of  those  who  hold  this 
general  view  believe  that  as  the  high-priest  fixed 
his  eyes  and  concentrated  his  thought  on  these 
jewels  and  on  the  great  attributes  which  they 
represented,  he  was  able,  partly  by  well-known 
laws  as  illustrated  in  hypnotism,  and  partly  as  the 
result  of  an  immediate  divine  influence,  to  pass  at 
once  into  communion  with  God  and  into  a  true 
prophetic  vision. 


3i6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

The  Probable  Explanation. 

Most  of  the  theories  now  named  may  at  once 
be  eliminated  from  onr  discussion.  There  are  but 
two  which  seem  worthy  of  consideration.  The 
first  of  these  is  that  which  identifies  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  with  the  twelve  tribal  gems  and  which 
regards  the  two  words,  by  the  figure  of  hendiadys, 
as  equivalent  to  perfect  illumination.  This  is 
the  view  which  the  author  had  strong  preposses- 
sions to  adopt.  There  is  much  to  be  said  in  its 
favor.  If  the  words  were  regarded  merely  as 
epithets  applied  to  the  stones  in  the  breast-plate 
they  would  seem  to  be  especially  appropriate. 
These  stones  were  intrinsically  brilliant,  splendid, 
and  luminous,  and  thus  they  might  apparently  be 
termed  with  propriety  Lights  and  Perfections. 
It  is  fair  for  us  to  assume  that  these  stones  were 
the  most  perfect  of  their  kind.  Then,  again,  if 
the  Urim  and  Thummim  were  not  identical  with 
the  gems  of  the  breast-plate,  it  seems  difficult  to 
explain  the  fact  that  the  inspired  historian  gives 
no  account  of  their  preparation  and  of  their  relig- 
ious uses.  All  other  parts  of  the  ritual  are  de- 
scribed with  the  utmost  carefulness ;  every  pin  of 
the  tabernacle  and  every  thread  of  the  priestly 
garments  had  to  be  inade  according  to  divine  di- 
rection ;  and  yet  here  are  symbols  of  the  utmost 
importance  in  obtaining  responses  from  God,  and 
no  account  is  given  of  their  preparation  or  conse- 
cration for  this  sacred  function.      The  silence  of 


WHAT  WERE   THE    URIM  AND   THUMMIM?     3^7 

the  historian,  it  is  natural  to  believe,  g-ave  a  strong 
presumption  that  the  Urim  and  Thummim  were 
identical  with  the  brilliant  i^ems  of  the  breast- 
plate. 

But  there  is  an  objection  to  this  view  suggested 
in  Leviticus  viii.  8,  "  And  he  put  the  breast-plate 
upon  him;  also  he  put  in  the  breast-plate  the 
Urim  and  Thummim."  This  passage  clearly 
speaks  of  these  symbols  as  being  put  into  the 
breast-plate  ;  this  seems  to  be  also  the  clear  mean- 
ing of  the  words  in  the  verse,  which  is  really  the 
text  of  this  discourse  (Exodus  xxviii.  30),  "And 
thou  shalt  put  in  the  breast-plate  of  judgment  the 
Urim  and  the  Thummim."  Other  passages  might 
be  quoted  illustrative  of  the  force  of  the  word 
"in"  in  this  case  (Exodus  xxv.  16,  21),  "  And  thou 
shalt  put  into  the  ark  the  testimony  which  I  shall 
give. "  This  latter  verse  shows  that  the  testimony 
was  distinct  from  the  ark  into  which  it  was  put. 
It  would,  therefore,  seem  a  natural  inference  that 
the  Urim  and  Thummim  were  in  like  manner  dis- 
tinct from  the  breast-plate,  and  that  they  bore  to 
the  breast-plate  a  relation  similar  to  that  which  the 
tables  of  testimony  bore  to  the  ark  of  the  cove- 
nant. It  would  thus  seem  that  Moses,  after  in- 
serting the  precious  stones  in  the  "pectoral,"  was 
commanded  to  put  the  Urim  and  Thummim  into 
some  fold  or  pouch  of  this  same  pectoral,  even 
as  he  put  the  tables  into  the  ark.  It  seems  im- 
possible to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  these  symbols 
were  in  some  way  put  into  the  fold  or  lining  of 


3iS  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

the  breast-plate.  Dr.  Bush  in  his  comments  on 
this  verse  strives  to  break  the  force  of  this  reason- 
ing by  stating  that  the  stones  of  the  breast-plate 
might  not  have  been  attached  externally,  but  that 
the  pectoral  was  of  the  nature  of  a  bag  or  pocket 
in  which  the  stones  themselves  may  have  been 
deposited;  but  his  reasoning  fails  to  carry  con- 
viction. 

The  Most  Approved  Theory. 

Modern  Egyptology  furnishes  us  with  a  clew  to 
the  true  explanation.  All  intelligent  students  will 
admit  that  there  are  many  points  of  similarity  be- 
tween the  Jewish  and  Egyptian  systems  of  wor- 
ship. For  a  long  time  both  Jewish  and  Christian 
scholars  were  slow  to  recognize  this  fact.  They 
feared  that  by  admitting  this  similarity  it  would 
militate  against  Judaism  as  a  divinely  revealed 
religion.  It  was  long  believed  that  no  custom, 
rite,  or  symbol  was  introduced  into  Judaism  from 
any  system  of  heathenism.  Sometimes  the  trans- 
ference to  Judaism  of  things  common  to  it  and  to 
Egyptian  heathenism  was  affirmed  as  a  divine 
condescension  to  the  superstitious  notions  of 
Israel  when  in  a  condition  of  ignorance  and  de- 
basement, but  that  view  is  not  considerate  or  even 
tenable.  Fortunately  the  prejudice  of  earlier 
times  in  this  regard  is  now  passing  away.  It  may 
be  true — it  certainly  is  true,  in  some  respects — 
that  the  Egyptians  got  many  of  their  rites  and 
symbols  from  the  Hebrews,  and  no  doubt  the  law 


I VII AT  WERE   THE    URIM  AND   TIIUMMIM?     319 

of  reciprocal  influence  was  in  operation.  In  quite 
recent  years  so  many  new  sources  of  knowledge 
on  this  subject  have  been  made  available  that  now 
the  interchange  of  religious  ideas  and  symbols  is 
not  a  question  of  argument,  but  of  fact.  The  an- 
cient paintings  and  sculptures  not  only  give  in- 
struction regarding  the  nation  in  peace  and  war 
but  also  concerning  its  social  customs  and  relig- 
ious rites.  We  now  fully  know  much  which  half 
a  century  ago  was  entirely  unknown  regarding 
the  garments  worn  by  the  priests,  and  the  cere- 
monial observances  in  their  religious  services. 
There  is  a  striking  similarity  even  between  the 
Egyptian  ark  borne  by  the  priests  and  the  ark  of 
the  Covenant  as  described  by  Moses;  the  similar- 
ity is  found  even  in  the  manner  in  which  both 
arks  were  carried.  Did  the  Jews  borrow  from  the 
Egyptians?  Did  the  Egyptians  borrow  from  the 
Jews?  Did  both  derive  their  ideas  from  some 
common  and  patriarchal  source?  This  latter  is 
the  most  probable  view;  doubtless,  many  ideas 
came  down  from  remote  antiquity  as  the  sons  of 
Noah  were  scattered  to  different  lands.  At  the 
moment,  we  are  stating  the  fact  of  this  similarity 
and  not  attempting  to  account  for  it.  The  earliest 
religious  ideas  were  preserved  among  the  Jews 
in  comparative  purity,  while  among  the  nations 
which  knew  not  God  they  were  gradually  cor- 
rupted and  mingled  with  abominably  idolatrous 
practices,  but  many  essential  truths  still  remained. 
Ideas,   rites,  and  symbols  would  not  be  adopted 


320  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

by  the  Israelites  from  the  Egyptians  merely  be- 
cause they  were  Egyptian;  but  they  might  be 
adopted  because  they  were  right,  were  primitive, 
were  divine  in  their  origin,  and  thus  they  might 
again  be  ordained  by  Moses.  That  in  a  corrupted 
form  some  of  them  w^ere  observed  by  the  Egyp- 
tians is  no  reason  why  in  their  religious  meaning 
and  true  form  they  should  not  be  observed  by  the 
Hebrews.  This  consideration  deserves  emphasis ; 
it  has  been  too  much  overlooked  in  past  years  in 
studying  the  Bible. 

Egyptian  Teachings. 

Bearing  these  great  principles  in  mind,  we  are 
prepared  to  see  their  illustration  in  connection 
with  the  Urim  and  Thummim.  The  Egyptian 
paintings  show  a  pectoral  ornament  somewhat 
corresponding  to  the  Jewish  cJiosen  or  breast-plate. 
In  addition  to  this  discovery,  two  Greek  historians 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Egyptian  arch- 
judge,  who  was  always  a  priest,  venerable  in  age, 
distinguished  in  learning,  and  commendable  in 
character,  always  wore  a  gold  chain  around  his 
neck — a  gold  chain  to  which  was  suspended  an 
image  made  of  a  sapphire  stone  which  was  called 
in  Greek  Aletheia^  meaning  "Truth,"  when  he 
officiated  in  civil  and  religious  functions.  With 
this  image  he  touched  the  litigant  when  a  suit 
began,  and  he  permitted  the  winner  to  look  upon 
it  or  to  kiss  it  when  he  had  gained  his  cause.  It 
is  believed  that  this  image  was  a  representation 


WHAT  ]VERE   THE    URIM  AND   THUMMIM?     321 

of  the  goddess  Thmei,  who  was  worshipped  as 
"  Truth  and  Justice,"  and  it  is  not  a  little  remark- 
able that  the  very  name  of  this  Egyptian  deity 
suggests  the  word  Thummim.  A  mummy  was 
found  at  Cairo  around  whose  neck  was  found  a 
chain,  to  which  was  attached  a  plate  or  symbol 
with  the  figure  of  a  bird,  which  suggested  Truth 
and  Justice.  It  is  interesting  also  to  know  that 
traces  of  a  similar  custom  are  found  among  the 
Romans,  for  among  the  Vestal  Virgins  she  sat 
who  was  called  "Maxima,"  and  who  assisted  in 
the  trial  of  causes.  To  this  hour  a  triangular 
mirror  is  found  in  courts  of  law  in  Russia  which 
in  some  mysterious  way  symbolizes  the  presence 
of  the  Czar  and  through  him  the  presence  of  God. 
As  one  looks  into  the  mirror  and  sees  liimself,  so 
it  is  believed  the  Czar,  and  above  him  God,  look 
into  the  heart.  This  mirror,  indirectly  at  least, 
implies  the  presence  of  Justice,  and  the  necessity 
of  truth.  Something  similar  is  also  known  among 
the  Japanese,  and  it  is  an  interesting  fact  that  to 
this  hour  in  Great  Britain  "the  royal  mace"  is 
borne  by,  or  carried  before,  a  magistrate  as  the 
symbol  of  his  authority,  and  it  must  be  laid  upon 
the  table  of  the  clerk  when  the  House  is  in  ses- 
sion. It  was  long  believed  that  the  Egyptians 
derived  the  custom  under  discussion  from  the 
Jews  after  Solomon's  marriage  with  the  daughter 
of  Pharaoh;  but  it  is  now  quite  certain,  as  the  re- 
sult ot  comparatively  recent  studies,  that  these 
resemblances    to   Hebrew  customs    belong   to   a 


322  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

much  earlier  period.  This  representation  of  the 
Egyptian  goddess  expressed  the  notion  of  two 
truths,  or  the  double  character  of  Truth  and  Jus- 
tice. Before  the  election  of  a  king  among  the 
Jews  the  chief  priest  was  a  civil  officer  as  well  as 
a  religious  functionary ;  in  this  respect  the  analogy 
between  the  two  peoples  is  all  the  closer.  It  has 
been  reasonably  suggested  that  the  touch  of  the 
successful  litigant  with  the  image  in  the  Egyptian 
court  bears  some  relation  to  Isaiah  vi.  7,  "  Lo,  this 
hath  touched  thy  lips ;  and  thine  iniquity  is  taken 
away,  and  thy  sin  purged";  also  to  Jeremiah  i.  9; 
Esther  v.  2,  and  many  instances  in  the  Bible  in 
which  touching  represents  the  impartation  or  pos- 
session of  miraculous  power  or  virtue. 

If  we  were  to  carry  out  the  similarity  still 
further  it  might  be  found  that  the  Urim  and 
Thummim,  as  signifying  Light  and  Truth,  bear 
some  analogy  to  the  two  figures  of  Ar^  the  Sun, 
and  TJimci^  Truth — figures  worn  by  the  Egyptians 
in  their  breast-plate.  Often  Thmei  is  represented 
by  a  figure  wearing  two  ostrich  feathers.  It  is 
known  also  that  in  the  final  judgment  Osiris  is 
represented  as  wearing  around  his  neck  this 
double  image  of  Justice  and  Truth. 

It  is  not  forgotten  that  there  have  been  argu- 
ments used  against  the  Egyptian  origin  of  the 
Urim  and  Thummim ;  but  these  arguments  have 
already  been  virtually  named  in  connection  with 
our  discussion  of  the  tribal  gems  in  the  breast- 
plate as  the  Urim  and  Thummim.      It  is  known 


WHAT   JVERE    THE    UKIM  AND   THUMMIM?     323 

that  in  the  early  days,  as  even  now,  peculiar  virtue 
was  often  attributed  to  gems  as  amulets  and 
charms;  thus  jasper,  amethyst,  emerald,  and  all 
stones  were  supposed  to  have  a  peculiar  signifi- 
cance and  to  be  influential  in  warding  off  evil  and 
in  bringing  good.  We  cannot  suppose  that  God 
would  indorse  any  heathen  or  superstitious  ideas 
in  the  use  of  such  a  symbol,  but  He  could  exalt  it, 
purify  it,  and  glorify  it,  and  make  it  a  part  of  true 
worship.  We  know  that  in  Egyptian  thought  the 
mystic  Scarabaeus  was  an  emblem  of  profound  sig- 
nificance ;  as  it  came  out  of  the  dark  earth  after 
the  flood  of  waters  it  was  therefore  the  symbol  of 
life  out  of  death  and  of  transformation  and  resur- 
rection. In  many  countries  various  symbols  came 
to  be  virtually  thoughts  and  words  in  painting  or 
sculpture.  Thus  some  symbol,  whether  or  not 
suggested  to  the  Hebrews  by  the  Egyptians, 
seems  to  have  been  placed  in  the  chosen^  setting 
forth  the  great  and  glorious  fact  that  Light  and 
Truth  were  a  blessed  revelation  from  God,  were 
the  centre  of  the  nation's  life,  the  guiding  star  of 
the  nation's  progress,  and  the  glorious  ideal  of 
the  nation's  hope.  This  was  the  Urim  and 
Thummim. 

Typical  Significance. 

There  is  not  space  to  discuss  the  process  of  con- 
sulting Jehovah  by  Urim  and  Thummim;  there 
is,  perhaps,  even  greater  doubt  regarding  the 
method  of  consultation  than  regarding  the  Urim 


324  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

and  Tliummim  themselves.  It  seems  certain  that 
these  symbols  were  closely  connected  with  the 
theocratic  government  of  the  Hebrews,  and  that 
after  that  government  passed  away  this  method 
of  consulting  God  seemed  also  to  have  passed 
away.  All  pertaining  to  the  office  of  the  high- 
priest  was  typical  of  the  Christian  dispensation 
and  of  the  office  and  work  of  Christ.  This  is, 
doubtless,  true  also  of  the  Urim  and  Thummim. 
Christ  is  the  glory  of  the  old  dispensation.  He 
is  the  very  heart  of  the  Bible.  He  was  and  is  the 
true  Urim  and  Thummim ;  He  was  the  end  of  the 
law  for  righteousness ;  He  was  che  reality  of  every 
symbol,  the  substance  of  every  shadow,  the  de- 
sire of  every  longing  heart.  He  was  Light,  Per- 
fection, and  Truth.  He  was  "  the  true  light  which 
lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world." 
He  was  Perfection,  "  being  made  perfect,  he  be- 
came the  author  of  salvation  to  all  that  obey 
Him."  He  was  Manifestation:  "He  was  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh."  He  was  also  "the  Way, 
the  Truth,  and  the  Life."  Through  the  Urim  and 
Thummim  a  measure  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was 
granted  to  the  Jewish  high-priest;  but  Christ  is  a 
high-priest  who  possesses  the  Holy  Ghost  without 
measure.  Christ  is  a  high-priest  "who  put  on 
righteousness  as  a  breast-plate."  Christ  is  the 
glorious  Luminary  of  the  new  Jerusalem.  He  is 
its  Perfection.  Perhaps  the  Urim  and  Thummim 
are  suggestive  also  of  "the  white  stone"  which  is 
beautifully  symbolic  in  the  Christian  mysteries  as 


WHAT  WERE   THE    URIM  AXD    THUMMIM?     325 

set  forth  in  the  book  of  Revelation.  We  are  thus 
sweetly  led  by  the  Lights  and  Perfections,  the 
Urim  and  Thummim,  to  the  cross,  to  the  feet  and 
to  the  heart  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  Light  of  all  dis- 
pensations, of  all  religions,  of  all  philosophies,  of 
all  civilizations  and  of  all  experiences,  and  the 
crowning  glory,  cloudless  beauty,  and  ineffable 
bliss  of  the  heavenly  city,  the  new  Jerusalem. 


XIX. 

DID   BALAAM'S   ASS    LITERALLY   SPEAK 
WITH   MAN'S  VOICE? 


XIX. 

DID    BALAAM'  S  ASS   LITERALLY 
SPEAK   WITH    MAN'S   VOICE? 

The  narrative  in  Numbers  the  twenty-second 
chapter,  and  the  aUusion  to  this  narrative  in  2 
Peter  ii.  15,  16,  have  been  regarded  by  most  Bible 
readers  and  commentators  as  fraught  with  great 
difficulties.  In  the  minds  of  some  Christians 
these  difficulties  are  so  great  that  they  are  dis- 
posed to  reject  the  entire  narrative  as  fictitious, 
or  at  least  as  utterly  inexplicable.  It  is,  there- 
fore, of  very  great  importance  that  an  interpreta- 
tion shall  be  found  which  is  true  to  the  original 
narrative,  and  which  at  the  same  time  relieves  it 
from  difficulties  which  many  consider  to  be  in- 
superable. It  is  believed  that  a  genuinely  alle- 
viative  interpretation  can  be  given  which  is  also 
thoroughly  loyal  to  the  inspired  record,  more 
loyal,  indeed,  than  the  traditional  interpretation. 

Balaam  is  a  profoundly  mysterious  and  a 
strangely  interesting  man.  He  comes  suddenly 
into  the  sacred  narrative,  and  his  name  reappears 
in  the  Book  of  Revelation.  It  is  evident  that  in 
the  church  at  Pergamos,  Rev.  ii.  14,  there  were 
those  who  taught,  as  did  Balaam,  so  as  to  lead 
men  into  idolatry  and  the  gross  sins  of  the  flesh. 


33°  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

The  teachings  of  the  Nicolaitanes  were  of  like- 
character  and  tendency.  Much  of  mystery  at- 
taches to  the  name,  which  means  "  conquerors  of 
the  people."  Perhaps  both  names,  Balaam  and 
Nicolaitanes,  are  used  symbolically,  like  the  name 
Jezebel,  to  designate  certain  types  of  false  teach- 
ers. Balaam's  first  appearance  is  as  abrupt  as 
that  of  Elijah  the  Tishbite,  and  is  as  mysterious 
as  it  is  abrupt.  He  is  at  the  same  time  a  truly 
instructive  historical  character.  He  is  almost 
as  mysterious  as  Melchizedek,  and  yet  his  life 
is  full  of  lessons  of  the  greatest  practical  value. 
Both  in  his  virtues  and  his  vices  he  is  thoroughly 
human.  He  is  richly  endowed  with  the  gift  of 
prophecy ;  and  he  utters  sentiments  worth}^  of  the 
heartiest  commendation.  The  words  which  he 
spake  to  Balak,  as  recorded  by  the  prophet  Micah 
vi.  6-8,  are  not  surpassed  in  loftiness  of  thought 
and  eloquence  of  speech  by  any  words  of  man  re- 
corded in  the  Bible.  These  noble  sentiments  are 
an  anticipation  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount ;  they 
are  worthy  to  stand  beside  the  sublimest  truths 
uttered  by  the  Apostle  Paul.  The  man  who 
spoke  these  great  truths  was  fully  inspired  of  God, 
so  far  as  concerns  their  utterance.  God  used 
Balaam  in  wonderful  ways  in  connection  with  the 
progress  of  true  religion ;  and  his  name  is  thus  per- 
petuated through  all  generations.  There  is  no  liter- 
ary honor  so  great  as  a  place  in  the  divine  library 
which  we  call  the  Bible.  Compared  with  this  honor 
all  the  glory  of  human  fame  is  less  than  nothing. 


DID  BALAAM'S  A SS  LI TERA LLY  SPEA K?     -^^i 

In  the  Book  of  Numbers  xxii.  5,  Balaam  is  in 
troduced  as  the  son  of  Beor,  who  in  2  Peter  ii.  15 
is  called  Bosor.  This  form  of  the  word  may  be  a 
Chaldaism;  for  many  believe  that  the  Apostle 
Peter  was  in  Babylon  at  the  time  of  this  writing. 
But  the  change  in  the  form  of  the  name  may  be 
due  to  the  transmutation  of  the  letters  with  the 
desire  of  softening  the  sound  of  the  original  He- 
brew word.  Among  the  Midianites,  to  whom 
Balaam  belonged,  he  seems  to  have  exercised  an 
authority  not  unlike  that  possessed  by  Moses 
among  the  Israelites.  In  Numbers  xxxi.  8  his 
name  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  five 
kings  of  Midian,  indicating  that  he  possessed  high 
rank  and  exercised  great  authority.  His  home 
was  at  Pethor,  a  city  of  Mesopotamia  and  prob- 
ably on  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates,  although  its 
exact  site  is  entirely  unknown.  Some  have  sup- 
posed that  as  Pethor  is  derived  from  the  word 
patJior^  to  "interpret,"  it  is  the  name  of  a  place 
which  was  the  chief  resort  of  men  who  professed 
to  explain  occult  arts  and  to  interpret  the  will  of 
the  gods.  The  name  Balaam  may  mean  "  lord  of 
the  people,"  but  others  understand  it  to  be  "the 
destruction  of  the  people,"  with  an  allusion  to  his 
supposed  supernatural  powers ;  and  it  is  also  sug- 
gested that  his  father's  name  probably  comes 
from  a  root  meaning  to  consume  or  destroy.  God 
now  and  then  chooses  out  persons  dwelling  among 
the  heathen  and  endues  them  with  remarkable  and 
unexpected  knowledge  of  Himself  for  the  accom- 


332  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

plishment  of  His  great  and  holy  purposes.  Ba- 
laam belonged  to  this  class  of  divinely  chosen  in- 
struments in  God's  method  of  dealing  with  men. 
He  certainly  was  a  man  of  high  intellectual  attain- 
ments; indeed,  he  was  in  the  true  sense  of  the 
word  a  genius  of  a  rare  order.  He  had  poetical 
and  prophetical  gifts  as  great  as  they  were  rare 
then  and  now ;  he  was  literally  a  seer  and  a  poet. 
He  possessed  remarkable  intuitions  of  spiritual 
truth;  and  he  also  recognized  God  as  the  author 
of  his  unusual  endowments..  He  thus  stood  on 
that  mysterious  borderland  which  overlaps  true 
religion  on  the  one  side  and  gross  heathenism  on 
the  other.  Ever  and  anon  in  different  ages  and 
lands  inexplicable  men  of  this  character  are  found. 
Some  of  these  men  are  partly  deceived,  and  are 
partly  deceivers ;  and  often  the  most  analytic  his- 
torian cannot  draw  the  lines  of  separation  between 
these  two  conditions.  Indeed,  often  the  men 
themselves  could  not  always  tell  when  they  were 
acting  under  high  motives  and  when  impelled  by 
the  grossest  ambitions.  The  great  plays  of 
Shakespeare  finely  illustrate  the  apparently  con- 
tradictory elements  in  the  lives  of  men.  Now 
Dr.  Jekyll  comes  forward  and  now  Mr.  Hyde  ap- 
pears in  many  lives  in  many  lands  and  at  various 
times;  it  is  not  otherwise  in  some  measure  in  the 
lives  of  all  men.  There  were  times  when  the 
Apostle  Paul  was  distinctly  conscious  of  these  con- 
tradictory elements  in  his  deepest  nature. 


DID  BALAAM'S  A SS  LI TERA LLY  SPEA K?     ^,2,2, 

Historic  Glimpses. 

Balaam's  natural  and  acquired  gifts  gave  him 
great  influence  among  his  contemporaries.  It 
was  believed  that  he  had  power  not  only  over 
temporal,  but,  to  some  degree  at  least,  over 
eternal  destinies;  and  also  that  his  blessing  or 
curse  had  the  approval  of  God.  Josephus  calls 
him  an  "eminent  diviner."  He  has  been  well 
called  by  Bishop  Newton  "  a  strange  mixture  of  a 
man";  for  while  he  practised  an  art  expressly 
forbidden  to  the  Israelites,  he  possessed  some 
true  knowledge  of  Jehovah,  rendered  Him  wor- 
ship, and  received  from  Him  divine  communica- 
tions. Balaam  finally  came  to  believe  that  his 
great  gifts  were  his  own,  and  that  he  might  use 
them  to  advance  his  personal  interests.  The 
Israelites  were  now  marching  to  the  occupation 
of  Palestine ;  on  the  plains  of  Moab,  on  the  east 
of  the  Jordan,  they  were  encamped.  At  that  time 
Balak  was  king  of  the  land.  He  had  heard  of  the 
wonderful  manner  in  which  the  Israelites  had 
overcome  the  Amorites,  and  he  is  filled  with 
alarm.  He  knows  that  he  has  no  chance  what- 
ever in  fighting  these  victorious  invaders;  he 
feels  that  if  they  come  to  battle  he  had  better  sur- 
render at  once.  He  puts  the  case  very  strongly 
when  he  declares  that  the  Israelites  can  "lick  up 
all  that  are  round  about  us,  as  the  ox  licketh  up 
the  grass  of  the  field."  What  shall  he  do  in  his 
great  distress?     He   hears  of  Balaam,  the  sooth- 


334  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

sayer  of  Pethor.  He  will  now  have  recourse  to 
the  supernatural.  He  will  enlist  divine  power 
against  his  foe.  Here  a  great  truth  is  suggested; 
here  an  important  lesson  ma}^  be  learned.  It  is 
eminently  wise  to  invoke  supernatural  aid,  but 
we  should  be  quite  certain  that  the  aid  invoked  is 
truly  supernatural.  We  ought  not  to  be  satisfied 
with  appealing  to  Balaam  or  Simon  Magus.  Balak 
entered  into  a  league  with  the  Midianites  against 
the  Israelites.  He  also  hastily  sent  messengers 
to  Balaam  in  his  remote  home  with  rich  rewards 
to  secure  his  help  in  divination.  At  first  Balaam 
refused  with  emphasis;  but  later  he  hesitated, 
and  expressed  a  desire  to  seek  wisdom  from  God 
in  prayer.  He  ought  to  have  known  better  than 
to  pray  in  those  circumstances.  His  duty  was 
clear;  he  ought  not  to  ask  God  to  help  him  in 
compromising  right  with  wrong.  Other  messen- 
gers came  to  Balaam  with  promises  of  greater 
gifts  and  honors.  Again  he  juggled  with  right 
and  endeavored  to  cheat  God.  God  finally  granted 
him  his  desire,  but  assured  him  that  in  the  end 
his  plans  would  be  frustrated.  The  narrative  at 
all  these  points  is  remarkably  suggestive  and  in- 
structive. It  deserves  to  be  more  fully  studied  at 
these  points  than  the  purpose  of  this  discourse 
will  permit. 

We  now  see  Balaam  starting  on  his  journey 
with  the  messengers  of  Balak,  king  of  Moab. 
God  was  much  displeased  with  Balaam's  impor- 
tunity, and  yet  He  granted  him  in  some  sense  his 


DID  BA LAAM'S  A SS  L I TERA LL  V  SPEA K?     335 

desire.  On  the  journey  he  met  the  angel  of  the 
Lord,  who  stood  before  him,  Icsataii  lo^  for  a 
Satan  to  him,  or  an  adversary  against  him.  Now 
comes  the  remarkable  narrative.  Numbers  xxii. 
23-35.  This  entire  narrative  is  worthy  our  most 
careful  thought.  We  are  here  told  that  the  dumb 
brute  spake  with  a  human  voice.  The  animal 
seemed  to  have  a  deeper  spiritual  perception  than 
its  rider.  The  ass  saw  the  angel  standing  in  the 
way  with  drawn  sword  in  hand.  Balaam  smote 
the  creature  that  he  might  induce  it  to  continue 
the  journey.  It  is  a  strange  story.  What  is  its 
true  interpretation?  Is  it  a  narrative  of  events 
which  literally  occurred  as  here  stated?  There  is 
not  space  to  go,  in  the  effort  to  answer  this  ques- 
tion, into  all  the  details  of  the  narrative ;  but  two 
possible  interpretations  can  be  given,  and  only 
two  views  can  well  be  taken,  and  the  reason  for 
the  adoption  of  one  and  the  rejection  of  the  other 
will  be  stated. 

Two  Interpretations. 

Is  this  narrative  literal  history,  or  is  it  merely 
a  vision?  Is  this  a  description  of  an  objective  or 
a  subjective  experience?  Did  the  words  ascribed 
to  the  ass  proceed  literally  from  its  mouth,  or  was 
the  scene  transacted  in  the  mind  of  Balaam  in  a 
condition  of  ecstasy  or  trance?  These  are  the 
questions  to  be  answered ;  let  them  be  kept  dis- 
tinctly before  our  thought.  Either  answer  might 
be  given  with  certain  modifications  by  those  who 


33^         OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

fully  believe  in  the  authenticity  of  the  narrative ; 
the  correctness  of  the  narrative  is  not  to  be  called 
in  question  whichever  of  these  interpretations  may 
be  adopted,  for  the  question  is  simply  one  of  in- 
terpretation. Those  who  believe  that  this  is  a 
literal  narrative  affirm  that  the  incidents  recorded 
must  be  assumed  to  be  literal,  so  long  as  no  in- 
formation to  the  contrary  is  given.  They  claim 
that  it  would  be  unnatural  to  expect  any  of  the 
occurrences  to  be  a  vision,  except  a  statement  to 
that  effect  was  made;  and  that  if  the  visionary 
element  were  introduced  it  would  be  difficult  to 
tell  where  it  ended  and  where  the  historical  nar-. 
rative  began;  and  they  claim,  finally,  that  the 
language  of  the  Apostle  Peter,  in  his  second 
Epistle  ii.  i6,  favors  the  literal  sense.  Are  these 
claims  well  founded?  We  may  say  in  reply  that 
we  know  with  absolute  certainty  that  there  are 
numerous  instances  in  the  Bible  where  we  have 
abrupt  transitions  from  one  style  to  another,  and 
that  no  mention  of  the  transition  is  made.  The 
Bible  supposes  some  degree  of  sanctified  common 
sense  on  the  part  of  all  its  readers.  The  sacred 
writers,  therefore,  slide  frequently  from  events 
in  the  natural  world  to  the  relation  of  a  vision 
or  dream  wherein  notice  of  the  transition  is 
given. 

In  Genesis  xv.  i  we  are  told  that  the  word  of  the 
Lord  came  to  Abraham  in  a  vision.  In  the  fifth 
verse  Abraham  is  asked  to  look  toward  heaven 
and  to  tell  the  stars,  and  he  is  assured  that  like 


DID  BALAAM'S  ASS  LITERALLY  SPEAK?     337 

to  their  great  number  shall  be  his  seed.  In  the 
twelfth  verse  we  see,  as  Dr.  Bush  in  his  eomments 
on  the  narrative  especially  under  discussion  re- 
minds us,  that  it  was  the  daytime  when  Abraham 
saw  the  stars,  indicating  that  this  sight  was  a 
vision  and  not  a  literal  reality.  In  Jeremiah  xiii. 
1-7  we  see  that  Jeremiah  was  commanded  to  go 
to  the  river  Euphrates  and  hide  his  girdle ;  but  at 
the  time  this  command  was  given  the  prophet  was 
in  the  land  of  Canaan,  hundreds  of  miles  from  the 
Euphrates.  It  was  clearly  a  command  given  in  a 
vision.  So  Ezekiel  when  in  the  land  of  Babylon, 
Ezekiel  viii.  1-12,  was  ordered  to  dig  a  hole  in 
the  wall  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  he  was  then  shown  the 
abominations  of  the  house  of  Israel,  a  transaction 
which  certainly  must  have  taken  place  in  a  vision. 
The  voice  addressed  to  Samuel  when  he  minis- 
tered unto  the  Lord  before  Eli,  i  Sam.  iii.  i-io, 
was  clearly  of  the  character  of  a  vision ;  and  in 
the  fifteenth  verse  of  that  chapter  we  distinctly 
read,  "Samuel  feared  to  show  Eli  the  vision," 
DiarcJi^  a  word  always,  or  generally,  used  of  in- 
ternal visions.  In  John  xii.  28,  29,  we  are  told  of 
the  voice  which  came  from  heaven,  and  it  is  quite 
evident  that  it  was  addressed  to  the  inner  sense  of 
those  for  whom  it  was  especially  intended;  for 
others  heard  it  only  with  the  outward  ear,  and  to 
them  it  was  simply  a  meaningless  noise,  or  the 
voice  of  an  angel.  In  the  narrative  of  Paul's  con- 
version, Acts  ix.  3-8,  there  is  no  suggestion  that 
the  leading  events  were  simply  or  chiefly  internal 


33^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

or  subjective ;  but  when  we  compare  with  that 
account  Acts  xxii.  9  we  are  inevitably  forced  to 
the  conclusion  that,  in  its  deep  significance,  it 
was  to  the  Apostle  Paul  a  vision.  Other  instances 
might  be  furnished  leading  to  the  same  conclu- 
sion. The  language  of  the  Apostle  Peter  does 
not  forbid  this  interpretation.  In  quoting  a  pas- 
sage from  the  Old  Testamicnt  he  does  not  neces- 
sarily confine  himself  to  any  one  interpretation 
which  we  may  give  of  that  passage.  He  takes  the 
passage  as  he  finds  it.  In  like  manner  we  could 
refer  to  a  character  in  Shakespeare  or  in  any  great 
writer,  and  we  might  use  the  language  of  that 
character  without  entering  into  a  full  discussion 
as  to  various  interpretations  of  the  language,  or 
of  the  relation  which  the  character  sustains  to  the 
original  author's  purpose.  Could  not  the  Apostle 
Peter,  or  any  other  apostle,  have  referred  with 
perfect  propriety  to  the  Lord's  call  to  Samuel,  al- 
though it  was  in  a  vision?  Was  not  that  call  just 
as  real  when  addressed  to  the  inner  ear  as  it  would 
have  been  if  addressed  to  the  outer  car?  It  is 
not  a  question  of  the  reality  of  the  divine  com- 
munication, but  only  of  the  method  which  God 
chose  to  employ. 

Positive  Evidence, 

We  have  only  to  turn  to  Numbers  xii.  6  to  see 
that  dreams  are  designated  as  the  usual  mode  of 
divine  communication  to  the  prophets.  This  fact 
certainly  goes  far  to  confirm  our  belief  in  the  sub- 


DTD  BA  LA  A  M '  .V  A  SS  LI  TERA  LL  V   SPEA  K  ?     339 

jectivity  of  the  incident  under  discussion.  We 
there  read:  "  Hear  now  my  words:  If  there  be  a 
prophet  among-  you,  I  the  Lord  will  make  myself 
known  unto  him  in  a  vision,  and  will  speak  unto 
him  in  a  dream."  Balaam  belonged  to  the  class 
of  whom  this  affirmation  is  made.  Why  should 
we  doubt  the  correctness  of  this  positive  affirma- 
tion of  Scripture?  Is  not  the  narrative  before  us 
in  perfect  harmony  with  this  divine  promise? 
When  we  look  at  chapter  xxiv.  verses  3,  4,  15,  16, 
we  see  ihat  Balaam  speaks  of  himself  as  the  man 
"  which  heard  the  words  of  God,  which  saw  the 
vision  of  the  Almighty,  falling  into  a  trance,  but 
having  his  eyes  open,"  etc.  Perhaps  we  ought 
not  to  quote  the  words  "  into  a  trance" ;  the  He- 
brew may  admit  only  of  the  translation  "falling," 
or  "falling  down";  but  the  statement  has  its  ap- 
propriate application  to  the  incident  recorded  in 
the  narrative  whose  true  interpretation  we  are 
aiming  to  give.  Was  not  that  the  occasion  when 
Balaam  was  in  this  condition  of  prophetic  ecstasy? 
To  what  other  occasion  can  these  words  be  so 
well  applied?  That  condition  was  the  appropriate 
one  for  a  seer  like  Balaam.  Those  who  deny  the 
application  of  this  statement  to  this  incident 
should  clearly  establish  the  correctness  of  their 
denial.  It  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  name 
another  event  in  the  life  of  Balaam  to  which  this 
language  so  fittingly  can  be  referred.  It  seems 
almost  certain  that  the  appearance  of  the  angel 
was  to  the  inward  and  not  outward  eye ;  and  just 


340  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

SO  the  voice  of  the  ass  was  intended  for  his  spir- 
itual and  not  physical  ear. 

Another  argument  in  favor  of  this  view  is  that 
Balaam  expresses  no  astonishment  on  hearing  the 
ass  speak;  neither  do  his  servants;  neither  do  the 
Moabitish  princes  who  accompanied  him.  They 
seem  to  have  heard  nothing  unusual  and  to  have 
seen  nothing  supernatural.  If  Balaam  had  heard 
the  ass  speak,  we  might  expect  him  to  have  been 
struck  speechless  with  astonishment  at  so  unusual 
an  event.  But  he  goes  on  speaking  almost  with 
petulancy,  chiding  the  brute  as  if  it  had  been  a 
disobedient  servant.  His  language  certainly  is 
not  what  we  might  expect  from  one  who  had  wit- 
nessed a  prodigy  so  remarkable  as  an  ass  speaking 
with  a  man's  voice.  It  is  also  to  be  said  that  the 
drift  of  Jewish  interpreters,  as  well  as  that  of 
many  great  Christian  scholars,  favors  the  sub- 
jective explanation.  Maimonides  leads  off  with 
an  indorsement  of  this  interpretation ;  Leibnitz, 
Hengstenberg,  and  Tholuck,  and  among  compara- 
tively recent  American  scholars  Dr.  George  Bush, 
and  the  writers  in  Smith's  and  other  Bible  dic- 
tionaries, earnestly  support,  or  at  least  incline  to 
this  same  view. 

This  view  does  not  in  any  way  deny  the  historic 
reality  of  the  event ;  it  nowhere  denies,  or  even 
depreciates,  its  miraculous  occurrence  and  its 
divine  influence.  God  is  seen  to  exert  such  an 
influence  on  Balaam  that  the  reproof  which  he 
received  sank  deep  into  his  heart.      He  saw  this 


DID  BALAAM'S  ASS  LITERALLY  SPEAK?    341 

wonderful  sight  with  the  eyes  of  his  soul,  and  he 
heard  this  powerful  rebuke  with  his  spiritual  ear. 
The  angel  was  revealed  to  him  in  his  prophetic 
or  ecstatic  state.  Which  ever  view  we  adopt  we 
see  that  the  occurrences  were  realities  to  Balaam. 
The  subjective  view  does  not  make  the  events  to 
be  less  real.  In  any  case  there  was  a  direct  com- 
munication from  God  to  Balaam.  God  could 
have  put  the  sound  of  words  into  the  mouth  of 
the  beast,  or  into  the  ear  of  Balaam  ;  and  in  either 
case  it  would  be  equally  the  work  of  God,  and 
would  be  equally  effective.  We  may  readily  be- 
lieve that  all  the  incidents  narrated  actually  oc- 
curred on  the  natural  plane,  with  the  exception 
of  the  angelic  appearance  and  the  miraculous 
speech,  which  were  perceived  by  the  spiritual  eyes 
and  ears  of  Balaam.  To  him  it  was  all  a  terrible 
reality ;  to  him  this  was  a  real  theophany,  a  gen- 
uinely divine  interposition.  It  was  just  as  real 
as  if  it  had  all  been  a  literal  sight  and  sound. 
Why  should  we  doubt  the  correctness  of  this  inter- 
pretation? Certainly  it  is  in  harmony  with  God's 
usual  method  of  revealing  Himself  in  that  age; 
for  no  one  can  doubt  that  His  revelation  was,  for 
the  most  part,  by  dreams  and  visions.  Balaam's 
history  in  this  connection  shows  that  in  two  cases, 
at  least,  he  waited  until  night,  the  usual  and  nat- 
ural season  for  dreams  and  visions.  There  is 
no  certain  evidence  that  God  ever  revealed  Him- 
self otherwise  to  Balaam,  unless  this  case  be  an 
exception.       Why    should    we    introduce    a    new 


342  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

method  on  the  part  of  God?  Why  insist  on  a 
needlessly  difficult  interpretation  when  an  easier 
one  is  in  harmony  with  God's  ordinary  mode  of 
communication?  None  of  those  present,  as  al- 
ready suggested,  seem  to  have  been  cognizant 
that  any  communication  was  made  to  Balaam. 
No  wonder  is  expressed;  no  alarm  was  experi- 
enced ;  no  comments  were  made.  Let  us  adopt 
an  interpretation  which  fully  meets  all  the  re- 
quirements of  the  case,  which  relieves  the  narra- 
tive from  the  enormous  difficulties  of  the  literal 
interpretation,  and  which  is  in  perfect  harmony 
with  God's  usual  method  of  communicating  His 
will  to  Balaam,  and  to  other  Old-Testament  seers, 
which  is  in  harmony  with  the  statement  in  Num- 
bers xii.  6,  and  in  equal  harmony  with  the  words 
of  Balaam  in  the  twenty-fourth  chapter.  Why 
refuse  to  accept  the  teachings  of  these  Scrip- 
tures? Why  create  difficulties?  Why  not  believe 
the  Bible,  letting  Scripture  interpret  Scripture? 

Additional  Teachings. 

God  can  and  often  does  reach  out  His  hand  and 
choose  His  servants  from  among  idolatrous  peo- 
ples. Perhaps  reports  of  the  miracles  attending 
the  exodus  had  reached  Balaam  in  his  own  land; 
perhaps  he  was  a  descendant  of  Shem,  and  the 
germs  of  religious  truth  may  have  lingered  long 
among  the  people.  Perhaps  Jacob's  residence 
for    twenty    years   in    Mesopotamia  disseminated 


DID  BALAAM'S  ASS  LITERALLY  SPEAK?     343 

the  elements  of  true  religion,  though  mingled  with 
much  superstition.  God  can  still  select  His  great 
instruments  out  of  the  most  unfavorable  environ- 
ments. Balaam  even  spoke  of  God  as  "  the  Lord 
my  God."  Balaam's  sin  was  great.  He  dared, 
for  the  reward  which  Balak  offered,  to  abuse  his 
office  as  a  prophet,  and  to  think  that  his  divine 
gifts  were  his  own,  and  to  call  down  curses  on 
God's  people.  He  admired  righteousness,  but  he 
loved  the  wages  of  unrighteousness.  The  bearer 
of  sublime  messages  of  Jehovah,  he  still  counselled 
that  the  young  women  of  Moab  should  lead  the 
Hebrews  to  worship  Baal-Peor,  and  as  a  result 
twenty-four  thousand  Israelites  were  slain.  His 
conduct  in  this  regard  was  abominable  in  the  ex- 
treme. 

But  even  Balaam,  as  he  himself  frankly  con- 
fessed, could  speak  only  as  God  ultimately  di- 
rected. He  was  powerless  in  the  presence  of  the 
Almighty.  He  was  obliged  to  bless  those  whom 
he  wished  to  curse.  It  is  glorious  to  serve  a  God 
who  can  make  even  the  wrath  of  men  contribute  to 
His  praise.  The  fearful  doom  which  befell  Balaam 
warns  us  against  seeking  gain  in  ways  of  sin.  If 
we  are  to  die  the  death  of  the  righteous,  as  Balaam 
hoped  he  might,  we  must  live  the  life  of  the  right- 
eous as  God  commands  us,  and  as  our  highest 
interest  here  and  hereafter  requires. 

God  still  speaks. 


XX. 

DID   THE   SUN   AND   MOON   STAND   STILL? 


XX. 

DID   THE    SUN    AND    MOON    STAND 
STILL? 

Many  persons  are  greatly  troubled  by  the  diffi- 
cult miracles  and  histories  recorded  in  the  Bible. 
There  was  a  time  when  the  miracles  were  sup- 
posed to  be  of  great  evidential  value.  At  that 
time,  the  greater  they  were  in  number,  and  the 
more  stupendous  they  were  in  character,  the 
greater  was  their  supposed  value.  But  that  day 
has  passed  away,  and  it  is  not  likely  to  return. 
Now  the  miracles  themselves,  in  the  judgment  of 
many  critics,  need  the  support  of  alleviative  ex- 
planations. Many  persons  turn  away  from  the 
Bible,  not  because  of  what  it  really  teaches,  but 
because  of  what  they  suppose  that  it  teaches. 
We  ought  always  to  bear  in  mind  that  to  believe 
the  Bible  is  one  thing,  but  to  believe  all  the  in- 
terpretations of  the  Bible  which  some  persons 
choose  to  give  is  quite  another  thing.  Miracles 
performed  by  God  we  joyfully  receive ;  but  mir- 
acles imagined  by  commentators  we  certainly  are 
at  liberty  to  reject.  Unfortunately,  to  doubt  the 
interpretations  of  Scripture  given  by  some  men 
is  to  lead  these  men  to  declare  that  you  doubt  the 
revelations  given  by  God;  but  one  must  be  loyal 


348  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

to  God's  truth  even  at  the  expense  of  losing  the 
good  opinion  of  traditional  interpreters  of  that 
truth. 

No  one  who  really  believes  in  God  can  doubt 
the  possibility  of  miracles.  We  know  that  God 
metes  out  the  heavens  with  a  span;  we  know 
that  he  holds  the  waters,  even  of  the  mightiest 
oceans,  in  the  hollow  of  His  hand.  We  must 
firmly  believe 'that,  by  introducing  laws  now  un- 
known to  us,  He  could  stop  the  clock  of  the  uni- 
verse without  jarring  its  mechanism.  The  ques- 
tion before  us  is  not.  Could  God  perform  the 
stupendous  miracle  of  causing  the  sun  and  the 
moon  to  stand  still?  The  simple  question  is,  Did 
God  cause  the  sun  and  moon  to  stand  still  at  the 
command  of  Joshua?  Does  the  account  in  Joshua 
X.  12-14  declare  that  the  sun  stood  still?  It  may 
be  unhesitatingly  affirmed  that  it  is  not  so  stated 
in  this  Scripture,  nor  clearly  in  any  other  portion 
of  God's  Word.  We  know  well  that  a  man  can 
arrest  the  progress  of  a  machine  many  thousand 
times  greater  than  himself;  and  we  may  confi- 
dently affirm  that  God  could  arrest  the  progress 
of  the  world  in  its  course  around  the  sun.  All 
the  discoveries  of  modern  science,  when  rightly 
understood,  make  it  easier  to  believe  in  God,  in 
prayer,  and  in  all  spiritual  realities.  Let  us  clear- 
ly understand  that  the  only  question  before  us  in 
regard  to  this  passage  is  a  question  of  fact.  Was 
the  writer  speaking  in  impassioned  and  figurative 
language,  or  speaking  in  the  language  of  sober 


DID    THE   SUN  AND   MOON  STAND   STILL?  349 

and  literal  truth?  These,  let  it  be  repeated,  are 
simply  questions  of  fact.  This  passage,  it  is 
frankly  admitted,  has  given  great  difficulty  to 
many  commentators,  and  to  all  apologists  of  re- 
vealed truth.  God  for  wise  purposes  has  intro- 
duced miracles  into  both  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testament,  but  for  equally  wise  purposes  He  has 
apparently  reduced  them  to  a  minimum.  Let  us 
look  at  some  of  the  interpretations  which  have 
been  given  to  this  vexed  passage. 

Different  Interpretations. 

Many  of  the  early  rabbis  and  Christian  fathers 
took  the  literal  view  of  the  passage.  They  sup- 
posed that  the  sun  actually  stood  still  in  the 
heavens.  The  sun  was  then  believed  to  revolve 
around  the  earth;  thus  these  interpreters  were 
ignorant  of  the  diurnal  motion  of  the  earth,  which 
has  been  wellnigh  the  universal  doctrine  since 
the  time  of  Galileo  and  Copernicus.  This  view 
was  held  even  after  the  reception  of  the  Coperni- 
can  system  of  the  universe ;  but  it  was  then  ex- 
plained as  optical  rather  than  strictly  literal.  It 
made,  in  this  later  modification  of  the  view,  the 
earth  and  not  the  sun  the  stationary  body  at  the 
command  of  Joshua.  These  interpreters,  how- 
ever, differed  among  themselves  as  to  the  length 
of  time  during  which  the  sun  or  the  earth  was 
stationary;  some  said  forty-eight  hours,  some 
thirty-six,  some  twenty-four,  and  some  twelve. 


350  OLD    TESTAMENT  DTFEICULTIES. 

Another  class  of  interpreters,  led  perhaps  by 
Spinoza,  affirmed  that  the  miracle  was  caused  by 
refraction  and  reflection.  This  view  made  the 
sun  to  appear  above  the  horizon  after  the  usual 
time  of  setting".  We  know  that  we  get  the  after- 
glow of  sunset  in  the  diverse  forms  familiar  to 
travellers  in  lofty  mountains  and  in  high  latitudes. 
This  result  might  be  caused  by  a  change  in  the 
atmospherical  medium,  and  so  the  sun  might  ap- 
pear to  be  above  the  horizon  even  after  it  had  set. 
This  explanation  makes  the  miracle  much  less 
formidable  than  the  literal  view  necessitates.  It 
makes,  as  w^e  have  seen,  a  change  merely  in  the 
atmospheric  medium,  and  it  leaves  the  rotatory 
motion  of  the  earth  undisturbed.  The  sun  always 
is  set  before  it  appears  to  us  to  have  gone  below 
the  horizon ;  by  the  law  of  refraction  it  appears 
to  us  to  be  above,  when  really  it  is  below  the  hor- 
izon. According  to  this  interpretation,  all  that 
it  was  necessary  for  God  to  do  was  to  increase  an 
effect  observable  in  our  daily  experience.  We 
would  then  have  visibly  the  same  result  as  if  the 
earth  had  actually  paused  in  its  revolution  round 
its  axis.  This  explanation  will  relieve  the  minds 
of  many  readers  of  the  Bible,  and  it  will  account 
for  the  phenomenon  which  some  believe  they  find 
in  this  famous  passage  in  Joshua.  But  is  it  nec- 
essary to  introduce  even  this  modified  view?  The 
real  question  before  us,  as  already  remarked,  is 
simply  one  of  fact.  A  third  view  is  related  to  the 
one  just  given ;  it  is  what  is  called  the  subjective 


DID    THE    SUN-  AND   MOON   STAND   STILL?    35^ 

prolongation  of  the  day.  According  to  this  inter- 
pretation, the  day  was  not  really  lengthened,  but 
was  supposed  by  Joshua  and  the  Israelites  to 
have  been  prolonged.  They  were  so  busily  en- 
gaged in  conflict  with  their  enemies,  and  they 
accomplished  so  much  in  the  time,  that  they  did 
not  take  accurate  account  of  the  time.  It  seemed 
to  them  that  the  day  had  been  prolonged,  and  the 
writer  simply  records  the  popular  opinion.  This 
interpretation  will  relieve  some  minds  of  the  stu- 
pendous difficulties  inseparable  from  a  strictly 
literal  interpretation  of  the  passage.  There  is  a 
fourth  interpretation  which,  it  has  been  well  said, 
is  among  the  curiosities  of  biblical  exposition. 
This  view  supposes  that  the  lightning  which  ac- 
companied the  hailstorm  was  prolonged  far  into 
the  night,  and  that  thus  the  darkness  was  so  il- 
lumined as  to  appear  like  daylight. 

The   Better  View. 

Is  there  not  a  more  satisfactory  explanation 
than  any  of  those  thus  far  given?  The  view  pre- 
sented first  by  Maimonides,  the  learned  Jew  born 
at  Cordova,  March  30th,  1135,  a  master  in  the  He- 
brew Scriptures,  the  Talmud,  and  Jewish  litera- 
ture generally,  is  that  the  passage  is  simply  a 
poetic  way  of  saying  that  the  Israelites  won  their 
sublime  victory  before  the  setting  of  the  sun. 
Before  the  day  closed  five  kings  witli  their  armies 
were  utterly  vanquished.      This  view  is  indorsed 


352  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

by  Hengstenberg,  and  by  many  other  commen- 
tators, Jewish  and  Christian,  Roman  and  Prot- 
estant. 

It  is  very  doubtful  whether  a  strict  interpreta- 
tion of  the  words  will  warrant  us  in  making  Josh- 
ua's language  a  prayer  to  God.  Are  we  obliged 
to  regard  his  words  as  more  literal  than  the  apos- 
trophe of  Isaiah,  "  Oh  that  thou  wouldst  rend 
the  heavens  and  come  down,  that  the  mountains 
would  flow  down  at  thy  presence"?  Are  the 
words  to  be  taken  as  more  literal  than  the  state- 
ment of  Deborah  and  Barak  that,  "  The  stars  in 
their  courses  fought  against  Sisera"?  Are  they 
more  literal  than  the  words  of  the  psalm,  "  The 
hills  melted  like  wax  at  the  presence  of  the  Lord"? 
Or  the  words  of  the  other  psalm,  "  The  mountains 
skipped  like  rams"?  Are  they  more  literal  than 
the  words  of  Isaiah,  "  All  the  trees  of  the  fields 
shall  clap  their  hands"?  Joshua's  words  remind 
us  of  the  words  of  Wellington  at  Waterloo — *'  Oh, 
that  BlUcher  or  night  would  come!"  There  is  in 
the  "  Iliad"  a  prayer  by  Agamemnon  not  unlike 
the  w^ords  of  Joshua  on  this  occasion : 

"Jove  greatest,  Jove  most  glorious  sky-dweller,  cloud  be- 
dight, 
Let  not  the  sun  nor  darkness  fall  and  wrap  the  world  in 

night, 
Till  Priam's  stately  palace  I  cast  in  ruin  low." 

It  is  to  be  said  in  general  that  the  words  in  the 
original  have  been  greatly  misunderstood.      The 


DID    THE    SUN  AND   MOON  STAND    STILL?  353 

author's  meaning  is  very  obscure.  The  language 
attributed  to  Joshua  is  abrupt,  broken,  impas- 
sioned. It  is  absolutely  certain  that  literally  ren- 
dered it  does  not  assert  that  the  sun  remained  in 
the  heavens  a  day,  nor  an  hour,  longer  than  its 
usual  time.  The  passage  simply  affirms  that  the 
sun  stood  still  long  enough  for  the  people  to  be 
avenged  upon  their  enemies ;  it  did  not  set  until 
the  great  work  of  that  heroic  day  was  completed. 
A  people,  unused  to  the  appliances  of  war,  over- 
came with  great  slaughter  soldiers  fully  armed 
and  trained  to  military  exploits.  The  sun  and 
moon  were  witnesses  of  the  valorous  deeds  of 
God's  people;  they  held  their  courses  until  the 
triumph  was  complete. 

It  is  fitting  that  we  should  look  at  the  words  a 
little  more  closely;  a  careful  exarnination  will 
show  that  even  a  tyro  in  Hebrew  poetry  can  see 
that  the  words  will  not  bear  the  meaning  usually 
given  them  by  traditional  interpreters.  It  is  very 
doubtful  whether  the  language  attributed  to 
Joshua  is,  in  any  real  sense,  a  prayer.  No  He- 
brew scholar  w411  deny  that  here  nothing  is  said 
of  a  direct  address  to  Jehovah ;  the  address  is  not 
to  God^  but  to  the  sun  and  moon.  We  see  at  once 
that  the  language  in  the  original  properly  means, 
not  to  Jehovah,  but  before^  or  in  reference  to  Je- 
hovah. The  verb  translated  "  stand  still"  in  the 
original  is  "  doin^''  and  it  generally  means  "  cease," 
*' rest,"  "be  still,"  "keep  silent."  The  meaning 
**  stand  still"  seems  to  be  an  inference  from  the 
23 


354  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

thirteenth  verse,  and  not  a  translation.  In  Ex- 
odus XV.  1 6  and  in  Lamentations  ii.  lo  this  verb 
signifies  to  be  dumb  with  terror.  It  is  often  used 
figuratively  to  signify  a  silent  or  submissive  frame 
of  mind.  See  Psalms  Ixii.  ii;  iv.  4;  xxxvii.  7, 
and  Isaiah  xxiii.  2.  It  is  thus  certain  that  the 
meaning  is  very  indefinite.  We  have  positively 
no  right  to  make  this  word  certainly  mean  that 
the  sun's  course  was  arrested  in  the  heavens.  It 
is  also  to  be  observed  that  the  phrase  in  the  thir- 
teenth verse,  "  hasted  not  to  go  down  about  a 
whole  day,"  is  a  mistranslation.  The  Hebrew 
keydm  tdmiin  means  as  at  the  pcrfcxt  day.  This 
says  nothing  whatever  about  the  sun's  remaining 
in  the  heavens  for  a  whole  day.  If  we  compare 
Exodus  xxxi.  18,  and  other  scriptures  in  which  a 
similar  expression  is  found,  we  shall  have  full 
proof  of  the  correctness  of  the  interpretation  now 
given. 

It  is  distinctly  stated  in  the  thirteenth  verse 
that  this  account  is  written  in  the  Book  of  Jasher. 
The  scpJicr  haydsJidr^  or  the  "  Book  of  the  Upright, " 
appears  to  have  been  a  collection  of  eulogistic  odes 
in  praise  of  national  heroes.  This  quotation  is 
thus  a  part  of  a  triumphal  song,  like  that  recorded 
in  the  fifth  chapter  of  Judges,  where  in  the  twen- 
tieth verse  there  is  a  very  similar  thought,  which 
has  already  been  quoted  in  this  article.  The 
Book  of  Jasher  is  mentioned  in  2  Samuel  i.  18, 
where  reference  is  made  to  teaching  the  use  of 
the  bow.     There  it  is  said  the  David's  lamenta- 


DID    rilE   SrN-  AND   MOON  STAND   STILL?   355 

tion  is  partially  an  extract  from  this  book.  Some 
have  supposed  that  this  book  refers  to  some  book 
or  books  of  the  Bible  itself,  but  that  is  not  the 
common  opinion.  No  one  can  read  Joshua  x. 
even  in  English  without  feeling  that  verses  12-14 
are  a  quotation,  if  not  an  interpolation.  No  allu- 
sion is  found  in  the  Scriptures  to  this  event,  ex- 
cept in  an  obscure  passage  in  Habakkuk  iii.  1 1 ; 
and  Josephus  makes  but  a  slight  reference  to  this 
supposed  miracle.  A  vast  structure  of  argument 
has  gathered  around  this  passage,  and  it  is  now 
time  that  it  should  fall  to  the  ground.  The  im- 
portance of  the  passage  has  been  greatly  exag- 
gerated both  by  the  friends  and  the  foes  of 
revealed  religion.  It  is  certain  that  in  our 
version  the  passage  is  somewhat  of  a  mis- 
translation; it  is  also  equally  certain  that  it 
is  a  quotation,  and  it  is  possible  that  it  is  an 
interpolation.  In  no  case  ought  this  uncer- 
tain passage  longer  to  trouble  devout  students 
of  the  Word  of  God. 

Josephus  simply  says  in  referring  to  this  inci- 
dent :  ''  The  day  was  increased,  lest  the  night 
should  check  the  zeal  of  the  Hebrews."  We  have 
seen  that  if  we  accept  the  historicity  of  the  nar- 
rative, it  can  be  explained  by  the  recognized  laws 
of  refraction  and  reflection  without  involving  the 
tremendous  consequences  not  only  upon  the  globe 
itself,  but  upon  the  entire  solar  system,  and  even 
upon  the  equilibrium  of  the  whole  material  imi- 
verse,  which  the  traditional  interpretation  neces- 


35^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

sitates.  The  Copernican  system  as  set  forth  by 
Galileo  invested  the  passage,  interpreted  liter- 
ally, with  alarming  importance.  Around  it  fierce 
ecclesiastical  battles  have  been  fought.  The  Vati- 
can has  had  a  conspicuous  share  in  these  battles, 
and  has  had  often  to  confess  its  defeats.  The 
explanation  of  Kepler  is  deeply  interesting :  "  They 
will  not  understand  that  the  only  thing  Joshua 
prayed  for  was  that  the  mountains  might  not  in- 
tercept the  sun  from  him.  Besides,  it  had  been 
very  unreasonable  at  that  time  to  think  of  astron- 
omy, or  of  the  errors  of  sight ;  for  if  any  one  had 
told  him  that  the  sun  could  not  really  move  on 
the  valley  of  Ajalon,  but  only  in  relation  to  sense, 
would  not  Joshua  have  answered  that  his  desire 
was  that  the  day  might  be  prolonged,  so  it  were 
by  any  means  whatsoever?" 

In  writing  a  history  of  the  Civil  War  one  might 
well  quote  Whittier's  words  in  "  Barbara  Frit- 
chie" : 

"'Shoot,  if  you  must,  this  old  gray  head, 
But  spare  your  country's  flag, '  she  said," 

without  becoming  responsible  for  the  exact  and  lit- 
eral truth  of  the  story  of  this  woman's  loyalty. 
It  is  affirmed  that  history  will  not  indorse  the 
details  of  the  poem.  The  writer  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua  quoted  from  a  book  of  poems ;  he  so  in- 
forms us  in  connection  with  the  quotation.  Why 
can  we  not  believe  him?  Why  must  we  create 
difficulties  which  the  writer  takes  pains  not  to 


DID    THE    SUiV  AND   J/0  OX   STAND    STILL?   357 

suggest?  Let  the  battle  over  this  vexed  passage 
cease;  let  us  take  its  own  explanation  of  itself. 
Let  God's  Word  interpret  itself,  although  it  prove 
many  human  interpretations  to  be  erroneous. 
God's  Word  will  stand  forever. 


I 


XXI. 

DID  JEPHTHAH    REALLY   SACRIFICE    HIS 
DAUGHTER? 


XXI. 

DID  JEPHTHAH    REALLY  SACRIFICE 
HIS    DAUGHTER? 

This  question  has  for  many  generations  per- 
plexed Bible  students.  The  fact  that  Jephthah, 
in  the  eleventh  chapter  of  Hebrews,  is  mentioned 
as  one  of  the  heroes  of  faith,  has  led  many  per- 
sons to  doubt  that  he  really  offered  his  daughter 
in  sacrifice.  Volumes  have  been  written  on  the 
subject  of  his  rash  vow;  and  many  writers  have 
stoutly  maintained  that  his  character  should  be 
relieved  from  the  dark  stain  of  having  offered  his 
daughter  as  a  sacrifice  in  consequence  of  that  vow. 
The  account  is  found  in  the  eleventh  chapter  of 
the  book  of  Judges. 

Jephthah  was  the  ninth  judge  of  Israel,  and  was 
of  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  His  father's  name  was 
Gilead,  and  he  was  born  out  of  wedlock.  His  fa- 
ther having  died,  his  brothers,  who  refused  him 
a  share  of  the  heritage,  expelled  him  from  his 
home.  He  then  withdrew  to  the  land  of  Tob, 
which  was  beyond  the  limit  of  Hebrew  territory. 
He  was  distinguished  always  by  great  bravery  of 
character  and  by  equal  skill  in  arms.  After  his 
banishment  by  his  brothers,  a  number  of  desper- 
ate men  gathered  about  him,  and  he  became  the 


362  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

leader  of  this  reckless  band.  In  this  respect  his 
life  was  not  unlike  that  of  David  after  his  with- 
drawal from  the  court  of  Saul.  Jephthah  and  his 
companions  thus  resorted  to  a  life  of  brigandage ; 
but  such  a  life  was  not  deemed  dishonorable  in 
the  East  in  those  days,  nor  in  very  much  later 
time^,  especially  so  long  as  freebooters  preyed 
simply  upon  public  or  private  enemies  and  were 
not  guilty  of  needless  cruelties  in  their  brigand- 
age. They  might  rob  and  possibly  murder,  but 
they  must  do  both  with  delicacy  and  despatch, 
and,  according  to  the  rules  of  their  order,  with 
some  degree  of  gentlemanly  deportment.  This 
class  of  men  were  the  Robin  Hoods  of  that  early 
day.  We  well  know  that  in  the  border  wars  be- 
tween England  and  Scotland  a  class  of  men  of 
similar  character  long  flourished  with  some  degree 
of  governmental  authority  and  general  approval. 
We  also  know  that  Columbus  in  his  early  life,  and 
Drake  and  Raleigh,  the  naval  heroes  in  the  time 
of  Elizabeth,  and  others  of  this  general  character, 
were  really  pirates.  Jephthah  was  a  freebooter 
of  this  class,  and  his  aggressions  were  confined  to 
small  neighboring  nations,  who  were  in  some  sort 
the  enemies  of  Israel  even  when  a  nominal  peace 
was  observed. 

The   Deliverer   and  Judge   of    Israel. 

The  Ammonites  and  their  allies  had  held  the 
country  east  of  the  Jordan  in  subjection  for  eigh- 
teen years.     Once  more  the  people  turned  in  peni- 


I 


DID  JEPHTHAH  SACRIFICE  HIS  DAUGHTER?  Z^Z 

tence  to  Jehovah,  and  once  more  He  heard  their 
prayer  and  sent  them  deliverance.  The  daring 
deliverer  at  this  time  was  Jephthah,  the  rugged 
chieftain  and  reckless  freebooter.  His  dashing 
exploits  and  successful  enterprises  gave  him  the 
reputation  of  great  bravery  and  superb  heroism. 
Notwithstanding  that  his  brothers  had  driven  him 
from  home,  when  his  kindred  were  groaning  un- 
der foreign  oppression,  the  people  generally  looked 
to  this  lawless  compatriot  for  deliverance.  It 
must  have  been  a  proud  day  for  him  when  the 
deputation  was  sent  to  invite  him  to  take  com- 
mand. He  did  not  quite  forget  the  treatment  he 
had  formerly  received,  but  after  some  demur  and 
delay  he  consented  to  be  the  leader  of  Israel's 
faithful  band,  who  determined  to  return  to  God 
and  to  overthrow  the  enemies  of  the  nation.  The 
Ammonites  were  assembled  in  force  when  Jeph- 
thah sent  to  them  demanding  a  reason  for  their 
invasion.  His  whole  procedure  was  marked  by  a 
certain  kind  of  rude  dignity  which  we  cannot  but 
admire ;  it  shows  that  even  in  that  early  day  some 
provocation  was  required  before  any  war  was  con- 
sidered justifiable.  The  spirit  of  our  own  time 
in  this  regard  was  thus  early  anticipated.  There 
is  no  nation  to-day  in  Christendom  that  would 
declare  war  except  it  had  grounds  for  the  declara- 
tion which  other  nations  might  be  expected  heart- 
ily to  approve.  This  fact  makes  nations  extremely 
slow  in  our  day  to  issue  the  final  declaration  mak- 
ing war  inevitable.     This  principle  seems  to  be 


364  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

deeply  rooted  in  human  nature.  Jephthah  recog- 
nized the  propriety  of  this  procedure ;  and  the 
Ammonites  also  felt  obliged  to  justify  their  ag- 
gressive operations  by  affirming  that  the  land  be- 
yond the  Jordan  belonged  to  them  rather  than  to 
the  Israelites.  The  Ammonites  were  its  owners 
before  it  was  taken  from  them  by  the  Amorites, 
from  w^hom,  in  turn,  the  Israelites  had  captured 
the  territory.  On  these  grounds  they  attempted 
to  justify  their  effort  to  recapture  the  soil.  Jeph- 
thah laid  down  in  his  reply  a  principle  which  has 
been  observed  through  the  centuries  among  civ- 
ilized nations — a  principle  which  the  great  w^riters 
on  international  law  have  repeated  and  empha- 
sized. It  is  most  interesting  to  discover  in  this 
remote  country  and  time  the  germs  of  interna- 
tional law  as  it  has  been  fully  developed  in  our 
own  time.  It  was  here  affirmed  that  by  right  of 
conquest  the  Israelites  secured  the  territory  from 
its  actual  possessors ;  thus  the  Israelites  could  not 
recognize  the  claim  of  any  former  possessors,  w^ho 
had  rendered  them  no  assistance  in  securing  the 
territory,  but  who  had  rather  opposed  the  claims 
of  the  Israelites.  The  Ammonites,  however,  con- 
tinued to  assert  their  claims  to  the  soil,  and  thus 
the  issue  was  joined,  and  finally  resort  was  had 
to  the  arbitrament  of  w^ar.  Jephthah  thus  saw 
that  all  negotiations  with  the  king  of  the  Ammo- 
nites would  be  fruitless.  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord, 
as  a  spirit  of  strength  and  bravery,  came  upon 
him,  and  he  at  once  prepared  for  war.     The  Gil- 


DID  JEPIITHAH  SACRIFICE  HIS  DAUGHTER?  365 

eadite  elders  consented — and  their  consent  was 
solemnly  ratified  before  the  Lord  in  ^lizpeh — that 
in  the  event  of  being  victorious  Jephthah  should 
be  considered  as  the  head  of  the  nation. 

His  Solemn  Vow. 

The  war  on  which  he  entered  was  likely  to  be 
severe  and  deadly.  Jephthah  was  under  profound 
emotion;  and  he,  in  a  spirit  of  reckless  daring 
not  unmingled  with  religious  devotion,  solemnly 
vowed  to  the  Lord,  "  If  thou  shalt  without  fail  de- 
liver the  children  of  Amnion  into  my  hands,  then 
it  shall  be,  that  whatsoever  cometh  forth  of  the 
doors  of  my  house  to  meet  me,  when  I  return  in 
peace  froin  the  children  of  Ammon,  shall  surely 
be  the  Lord's,  and  I  will  offer  it  up  for  a  burnt 
offering."  The  word  here  rendered  "what- 
soever" in  the  authorized  version  may  be  ren- 
dered "whosoever,"  as  it  is  without  distinction 
of  gender. 

Jephthah  girded  himself  for  war.  He  burst 
upon  the  enemy  with  terrific  fury.  He  drove 
the  Ammonites  before  him,  capturing  twenty 
towns  from  Aroer  on  the  Arnon  to  Minnith  and 
to  Abel  Keramim.  The  Ammonites  thus  sus- 
tained a  terrible  overthrow.  Jephthah  was  thus 
victorious,  and  he  returned  in  peace  to  his  house 
in  Mizpeh.  The  news  of  his  glorious  victory  pre- 
ceded his  own  return  to  Mizpeh;  but  instead  of 
being  met  by  an  animal  or  by  a  slave,  his  only 


k 


3^6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

daughter,  in  whom  his  heart  was  bound  up  with 
peculiar  tenderness,  filled  with  pride  because  of 
her  father's  splendid  victory,  came  forth  with 
timbrels  and  with  dances  to  meet  the  triumphant 
hero.  Her  fair  companions  joined  her  in  this 
hour  of  gladness  and  glory.  But  the  sight  of  his 
daughter,  dancing  in  the  joy  of  her  heart,  was 
enough  to  freeze  the  blood  in  the  father's  veins 
and  to  stop  his  heart  in  its  beating.  What  can  it 
all  mean?  No  sooner  did  he  see  his  daughter 
than  he  rent  his  robes  and  cried,  "  Alas !  my 
daughter,  thou  has  brought  me  very  low;  for  I 
have  opened  my  mouth  unto  the  Lord  and  cannot 
go  back."  The  music  is  hushed;  the  maiden 
draws  near  in  silence.  The  hero  of  the  hour  is 
the  picture  of  despair.  The  wretched  man  for- 
gets all  the  victories  of  the  battle  in  this  moment 
of  domestic  tragedy.  Nobly  does  the  heroic 
maiden  speak :  "  My  father,  if  thou  hast  opened 
thy  mouth  unto  the  Lord,  do  to  me  according  to 
that  which  has  proceeded  out  of  thy  mouth ;  for- 
asmuch as  the  Lord  hath  taken  vengeance  for 
thee  of  thine  enemies,  the  children  of  J\.mmon." 
Her  beautiful  young  life  is  the  awful  price  of  his 
great  victory,  and  the  noble  but  misguided  young 
woman  insisted  that  he  should  not  disregard  his 
solemn  vow.  The  bearing  of  both  is  equally 
striking  in  this  sad  calamity  in  their  family  life. 
Must  she  die — she,  his  only  child,  and  so  young 
and  beautiful?  The  greatness  of  the  sacrifice  he 
must  make  almost  crushes  his  life ;  but  the  brave- 


DID  fEPHTHAH  SACRIFICE  HIS  DAUGHTER?  367 

spirited  maiden  rises  with  a  noble  grandeur  above 
her  own  sorrow,  and  above  her  father's  grief, 
with  her  mistaken  conception  of  God  and  duty; 
she  glories  in  her  father's  and  her  nation's  vic- 
tory, even  though  it  be  at  the  price  of  her  own 
beautiful  young  life.  She  is  calm  when  rough- 
cheeked  warriors  turn  pale  and  quiver  with  sor- 
row. She  merely  asks  for  a  short  period  to  be 
given  her,  which  she  will  spend  in  the  lonely 
depths  of  the  mountains  bewailing  her  sad  fate — 
bewailing,  as  did  the  Antigone  of  Sophocles  in 
her  special  grief,  that  she  must  die  without  the 
hope  of  becoming  a  bride  or  mother  in  Israel. 
No  doubt  all  eyes  were  turned  in  admiration  on 
the  heroic  girl.  Then  came  the  last  sad  scene, 
for  " he  did  with  her  according  to  his  vow." 

The  Daughter's  Fate. 

What  was  the  fate  of  Jephthah's  daughter? 
What  did  he  do  unto  her  according  to  his  vow? 
Volumes  have  been  written  in  answer  to  this 
question.  It  has  been  stoutly  maintained  that  \\2 
did  not  offer  her  in  sacrifice,  but  that  she  was 
simply  doomed  to  a  life  of  perpetual  celibacy. 
Others,  as  Professor  Bush,  have  affirmed  that  a 
human  sacrifice  was  contemplated,  but  that  dur- 
ing the  time  when  the  maiden  bewailed  her  vir- 
ginity upon  the  moimtains,  Jephthah  obtained 
better  information  respecting  the  nature  of  vows, 
and  that  finally  he  redeemed  his  daughter  at  a 


368  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

legal  valuation.  As  between  this  view  and  that 
of  perpetual  celibacy  the  idea  of  legal  redemption 
is  more  probable ;  but  neither  view  meets  the  con- 
clusion that  "  he  did  with  her  according  to  his 
vow."  If  she  were  preserved  from  death  there 
would  be  no  significance  in  the  lamentations  of 
the  daughters  of  Israel,  and  to  make  the  word 
"  lamentations"  mean  "  celebrations"  is  certainl}^ 
a  forced  significance.  There  is  really  no  difficulty 
in  the  text ;  the  entire  difficulty  arises  from  our 
unwillingness  to  accept  the  text  in  its  natural 
meaning.  Commentators  have,  therefore,  in- 
vented a  new  thing  in  Israel,  both  in  ancient  and 
in  modern  times,  that  a  damsel  should  be  conse- 
crated to  perpetual  virginity  in  consequence  of  a 
vow  of  her  father.  All  unprejudiced  interpreters 
must  admit  that  nothing  of  this  kind  is  contained 
in  the  vow ;  they  must  also  admit  that  this  idea  is 
utterly  foreign  to  all  Hebrew  notions  regarding 
wifehood  and  motherhood.  If  commentators  are 
at  liberty,  because  of  their  dislike  to  accept  the 
teaching  of  any  part  of  Scripture,  to  inject  into 
a  given  passage  what,  naturally  interpreted,  it 
clearly  does  not  contain,  then  Scripture  can  be 
made  to  mean  anything  which  commentators  de- 
sire. Many  Jewish  interpreters  admit  that  Jeph- 
thah  sacrificed  his  daughter,  and  affirm  that  she 
was  not  devoted  to  perpetual  virginity  or  to  any 
form  of  religious  service.  It  is  even  alleged  that 
the  dynasty  of  the  house  of  Eleazar  was  passed 
over  to  that  of  Ithamar  because  the  high-priest 


DID  JEPHTITAH  SACRIFICE  HIS  DAUGHTER?  369 

permitted  this  horrible  sacrifice  to  be  performed.* 
We  do  not  know  where  the  immolation  took  place, 
but  probably  on  some  altar  in  the  wild  region  be- 
yond the  Jordan.  The  painters  represent  it  as 
having  taken  place  at  the  altar  of  the  Tabernacle, 
and  Jewish  authority  can  be  quoted  for  this  view, 
but  it'  is  utterly  impossible  to  believe  that  such  a 
terrible  sacrifice  could  have  taken  place  at  the 
altar  of  God,  and  a  high-priest  as  the  sacrificer. 

The  Horrible  Sacrifice  Hateful  to  God. 

The  story  of  this  sacrifice  lingered  long  in  the 
memory  of  the  people ;  and  for  generations  after- 
ward Jewish  maidens,  in  sympathy  with  the  self- 
sacrificing  spirit  of  Jephthah's  daughter,  bewailed 
her  fate.  The  story  brings  us  into  the  atmos- 
phere of  classical  times.  We  are  reminded  of  the 
sacrifice  of  Iphigenia,  the  daughter  of  Agamem- 
non and  Clytemnestra.  Agamemnon  having 
vowed  to  offer  her,  and  having  failed  to  keep  his 
vow,  the  Grecian   ships  could  not  sail  from  the 

*  Joseph  Kimchi  is  especially  the  author  of  the  interpre- 
tation that  the  maiden  was  shut  up  in  a  house  which  her 
father  erected  for  this  purpose,  and  that  she  was  there  vis- 
ited by  the  daughters  of  Israel  four  days  in  each  year  while 
she  lived.  It  is  true  that  Hebrews  such  as  Levi  ben  Ger- 
som  and  Bechai.  and  Christian  scholars  such  as  Grotius, 
Bishop  Hall,  Dr.  Hales  and  some  others  of  earlier  and 
later  times  have  adopted  this  view.  Lightfoot  for  a  time 
held  this  view,  but  more  careful  study  led  him  to  abandon 
it  and  adopt  the  interpretation  which  the  story  naturally 
teaches. 

24 


37 o  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

port  of  Aulis  against  Troy  nntil  the  offended  gods 
were  propitiated  by  the  sacrifice  of  the  maiden. 
There  is  thus  often  a  close  likeness  between  the 
Hebrew  story  and  those  of  the  heathen  nations  of 
nearly  contemporaneous  times.  It  was  an  age  of 
rash  vows.  The  whole  nation  made  a  vow  against 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and  King  Saul  made' a  vow 
which  nearly  cost  Jonathan  his  life.  Jonathan 
w^ould  have  been  slain  but  for  the  interposition  of 
the  army ;  but  there  is  no  mention  of  an  interposi- 
tion on  behalf  of  the  heroic  but  misguided  maiden 
and  her  brave  but  superstitious  father.  Without 
doubt  the  darker  view  of  this  tragedy  is  the  cor- 
rect one.  It  is  true  that  human  sacrifices  were 
forbidden  by  the  law;  but  Jephthah  lived  in 
Gilead,  and  Gilead  adjoined  the  countries  of  Moab 
and  Ammon,  where  human  sacrifices  were  com- 
mon. In  the  unsettled  times  in  which  the  Jud^s^es 
lived  many  Israelites  adopted  the  cruel  practices 
and  superstitious  customs  of  their  heathen  neigh- 
bors, even  good  men  performing  acts  as  truly  for- 
bidden by  the  law  as  were  human  sacrifices. 
Thus  an  altar  was  set  up  by  Gideon  at  Ophrah 
against  the  distinct  law  on  that  subject.  It  can- 
not be  denied  that  human  sacrifices  were  in  these 
rude  times  often  considered  meritorious  and  pro- 
pitious by  some  Israelites,  as  by  almost  all  the 
heathen  peoples.  This  was  the  first  and  last  hu- 
man sacrifice  offered  in  a  mistaken  interpretation 
of  the  will  of  Jehovah.  We  must  constantly  bear 
in  mind  that  this  was  a  time  of  anarchy,  ignorance, 


DIP  JEPHTHAH  SACRIFICE  HIS  DA  UGIITER  ?  371 

and  superstition.  Vows  of  celibacy  were  then 
entirely  unknown  among  the  Hebrews;  the  idea 
of  nunnery  belonged  to  a  much  later  period,  and 
to  a  different  condition  of  society.  It  is  affirmed 
that  the  maiden  could  not  be  dedicated  to  the  ser- 
vices of  the  high-priest,  for  he  and  the  ark  were 
then  at  Shiloh  in  the  territory  of  Ephraim,  and 
Jephthah  was  then  at  deadly  war  with  that  tribe. 
There  is  something  peculiarly  painful  in  the 
idea  that  this  maiden,  perhaps  crowned  with 
flowers  and  led  forth  with  music  and  song  to  the 
altar,  could  have  been  a  sacrifice  pleasing  to  God. 
This  act  was  the  result  of  a  false  principle  and  a 
foolish  vow ;  it  was  an  act  utterly  hateful  to  God 
and  utterly  repugnant  to  all  the  finer  feelings  of 
human  nature.  Let  us  in  no  way  hold  God  or 
true  religion  responsible  for  so  cruel,  abominable, 
and  wicked  an  act.  Such  an  act  was  not  per- 
formed because  its  perpetrators  had  true  religion, 
but  simply  because  they  were  utterly  lacking  in 
true  religion.  It  was  not  performed  because  God 
commanded  it  or  approved  it,  but  because  its  per- 
petrators, living  in  a  heathen  atmosphere,  were 
ignorant  of  God's  will,  and  so  committed  an  act 
unspeakably  displeasing  to  God  and  dishonoring 
to  man.  Tennyson  in  his  poem,  "  A  Dream  of 
Fair  Women,"  gives  a  glowing  picture  of  this 
maiden  lifted  above  herself  in  her  desire  to  bless 
her  country,  assist  her  father  and  honor  her  God ; 
but  her  mistake  was  as  great  as  her  self-sacrifice 
was  heroic. 


i 


XXII. 

DID    SAMUEL    APPEAR    WHEN     SUMMONED 
BY   THE   WITCH    OF   ENDOR  ? 


XXII. 

DID      SAMUEL      APPEAR     WHEN      SUM- 
MONED   BY   THE   WITCH    OF    ENDOR? 

Saul,  the  first  king  of  Israel,  is  one  of  the  most 
romantic  and  tragic  characters  of  history.  He 
was  the  son  of  Kish  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  and 
his  name  means  "the  desired  one."  Zelah  was 
probably  the  place  of  his  birth.  His  father  was  a 
wealthy  and  powerful  chief;  and  Saul  while 
searching  for  lost  asses  found  a  kingdom.  A 
"  seer"  was  met  on  the  journey,  and  he  was  none 
other  than  the  prophet  Samuel,  who  after  a  little 
time  poured  over  Saul's  head  the  oil  of  consecra- 
tion. Saul  was  an  unusually  attractive  man  at 
that  moment,  as  he  towered  head  and  shoulders 
above  average  men.  He  received  both  an  inner 
and  an  outer  call  to  the  new  life  which  awaited 
him  by  the  ordainment  of  God.  The  latter  call 
was  given  him  at  Mizpeh,  when  in  his  modesty 
he  was  hidden  in  the  circle  of  the  baggage  which 
surrounded  the  encampment.  His  great  stature 
aroused  the  utmost  enthusiasm  of  the  people; 
and  soon  they  shouted,  "Long  live  the  king." 
This  was  the  first  time  this  shout  was  ever  heard 
in  Israel,  and  perhaps  in  the  world — a  shout 
later  so  often  heard  both  in  ancient  and  modern 


3/6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

times  in  scenes  of  joy  and  sorrow,  of  comedy  and 
tragedy. 

Later,  when  Saul  had  apparently  returned  to 
private  life,  he  heard  as  he  drove  his  oxen  near 
Gibeah  those  wild  lamentations  peculiar  to  Eastern 
towns  when  some  great  calamity  has  come.  Soon 
he  learned  that  Nahash,  king  of  the  Ammonites, 
had  issued  a  terrible  threat  against  Jabesh  Gilead. 
The  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  Saul,  as  upon  the 
Judges  in  an  earlier  day;  and  the  shrinking  and 
timid  man  was  immediately  transformed  into  the 
brave  patriot  and  heroic  leader.  The  bones  of 
two  of  the  oxen  which  he  was  driving  were  sent 
through  the  country  as  a  suggestive  message. 
The  people  came  in  a  body  to  meet  Saul  at  Bezek. 
The  Ammonites  were  totally  routed.  Soon  under 
the  direction  of  Samuel  at  Gilgal  the  monarchy 
was  inaugurated  anew,  and  Saul  was  recognized 
with  solemn  sacrifices  as  the  victorious  leader  in 
the  kingdom,  and  was  publicly  installed  and 
anointed.  Samuel  virtually  gave  over  his  own 
administration  to  Saul,  whose  military  successes 
produced  a  profound  impression  on  the  people, 
and  thus  the  monarchy  was  fully  established. 

Saul's  First  Transgression. 

We  are  passing  over  great  movements  with 
only  the  briefest  mention.  We  see  Samuel  grad- 
ually withdrawing  from  the  responsibility  of 
leader  until  Saul  fully  assumed  that  position  be- 
fore all  the  people.     God  was  the  true  King,  and 


DID   SAMUEL   APPEAR    WIIEX   SUMMONED?  377 

Saul  simply  His  lieutenant.  This  relation  was 
well  understood  both  by  Saul  and  the  people. 
This  is  the  true  idea  of  the  theocracy;  but  unfor- 
tunately when  Saul  was  put  to  the  test  of  this  idea 
he  proved  unfit  for  his  hig-h  office.  The  first 
trial  led  to  the  threat  which  ended  in  his  rejection 
by  God;  for  Saul  foro-ot  that  he  was  only  the  ser- 
vant of  Jehovah.  In  the  second  year  of  his  reign, 
as  it  is  believed,  he  strove  to  shake  off  the  heavy 
Philistine  yoke.  This  yoke  was  peculiarly  griev- 
ous in  his  own  tribe,  over  which  a  Philistine 
officer  exercised  some  degree  of  authority.  Soon 
he  raised  a  small  army,  which  under  the  leader- 
ship of  the  noble  Jonathan  took  a  fort  of  the  Phil- 
istines. Saul  later  was  reduced  to  a  great  ex- 
tremity, and  the  seventh  day  having  come,  whose 
expiration  Samuel  had  enjoined  Saul  to  await, 
Saul  ordered  sacrifices  to  be  offered.  Whatever 
was  the  exact  nature  of  this  act,  the  fact  was  soon 
recognized  that  Saul  in  performing  it  had  greatly 
sinned  against  God.  Saul's  conduct  at  this  point 
virtually  involved  a  rejection  of  God,  and  the  as- 
sumption of  the  claim  to  conduct  the  war  accord- 
ing to  his  own  will  rather  than  God's  command. 
Upon  Samuel's  arrival  after  the  completion  of  the 
sacrifice  he  pronounced  a  curse  on  Saul's  thought- 
less zeal.  Soon  after,  largely  through  the  bold 
exploits  of  Jonathan,  aided  by  a  panic  of  the 
enemy,  Saul  effected  a  great  slaughter;  but  his 
rashness  led  almost  to  the  death  of  Jonathan. 
The  reckless  vow  of  Saul  regarding   this  truly 


37^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

heroic  son  was  the  first  appearance  of  Saul's  mad- 
ness. The  Philistines,  however,  were  driven  to 
their  own  country,  and  for  a  time  were  confined 
within  its  limits.  Great  honor  thus  came  to  Saul, 
as  no  previous  riiler  had  reached  so  high  a  posi- 
tion and  had  won  so  striking  a  triumph.  Now  he 
began  the  organization  of  a  royal  establishment, 
and  we  soon  see  the  beginning  of  the  institutions 
which  marked  the  monarchy.  There  is  the  nu- 
cleus of  a  standing  army ;  there  is  a  bodyguard  of 
yoimg,  tall,  and  handsome  Benjamites;  and  there 
are  official  runners  and  messengers.  David  and 
Abner  are  the  two  principal  officers  at  court,  and 
they  sat  with  Jonathan  at  the  king's  table.  An- 
other officer  was  the  keeper  of  the  royal  mules. 
The  king  now  appears  in  state.  His  tall  spear 
became  the  symbol  of  his  office ;  and  it  is  still  the 
mark  of  the  dignity  of  the  Bedouin  sheik.  It  was 
reproduced  in  the  great  iron  staff  always  carried 
by  Ivan  the  Terrible  of  Russia  as  the  symbol  of 
the  Czardom.  This  spear  was  ever  after  asso- 
ciated with  Saul  in  battle,  at  his  meals,  and  in 
his  repose.  It  is  as  inseparable  from  his  name 
as  is  the  harp  from  David's  name.  We  now  see 
Saul  with  a  diadem  on  his  head  and  a  bracelet  on 
his  arm.  He  has  become  an  autocratic  rather 
than  a  theocratic  king. 

Saul's  Second  Transgression. 

The  years  pass.     There   is  war  with   Amalek ; 
and  in  sparing  the  conquered  king  and  retaining 


DID   SAMUEL  APPEAR    WHEN  SUMMONED?  379 

the  spo:l  Saul  disobeyed  the  command  of  Samuel. 
Thus  he  failed  a  second  time  in  the  trial  of  his 
obedience  to  God  and  to  His  prophet.  He  failed 
to  extirpate  the  Amalekitcs,  whose  hostility  to  the 
people  of  God  was  so  old  and  so  fierce.  Saul 
probably  spared  the  king  in  order  to  make  a 
greater  parade  at  the  sacrificial  thanksgiving. 
Josephus  expressly  says  that  Agag  was  spared  for 
his  stature  and  beauty;  such  a  prisoner  would 
greatly  grace  Saul's  triumph.  At  southern 
Carmel  he  set  up  a  monument,  probably  a  tri- 
umphal arch  of  myrtles,  olives,  and  palms,  to 
commemorate  his  victories.  His  spirit  of  rebel- 
lion against  God  led  to  his  final  rejection ;  and  his 
disobedience  led  Samuel  to  withdraw  all  approval 
from  Saul.  The  separation  between  them  was 
indicated  by  the  rent  in  Samuel's  robe  of  state, 
as  he  tore  himself  awa)^  from  Saul's  grasp.  He 
was  thus  left  to  his  sins  and  their  inevitable  pun- 
ishment ;  and  we  read  that  "  Samuel  mourned  for 

Saul." 

His  Last  Offence. 

Prom  the  time  of  Samuel's  rejection  of  him 
Saul's  life  is  one  long  tragedy.  Doubtless  at 
times  he  was  mentally  and  morally  insane.  The 
frenzy  which  occasionally  only  toucl^ed  him  lightly 
at  other  times  controlled  him  completely.  He 
became  at  times  the  victim  of  melancholia;  and 
then  the  subject  of  fierce  and  uncontrollable  pas- 
sion. David's  harp  temporarily  chased  away  his 
sorrow:  but  soon  it  came  back  associated  with  the 


380  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

savage  madness  which  broke  out  against  David 
and  Jonathan.  The  monarchy  which  he  had  or- 
ganized was  breaking  down  at  every  point.  The 
Philistines  were  again  in  the  land,  and  their  char- 
iots and  horses  swept  over  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon. 
Near  Shunem  their  camp  was  pitched.  On  the 
opposite  side,  on  Mount  Gilboa,  was  the  army  of 
Israel,  clinging  to  the  heights  for  safety  against 
the  resistless  chariots  of  the  Philistines.  Great 
events  are  rushing  on  apace.  Saul's  army  is  near 
the  spring  of  Harod,  or  the  Spring  of  Trembling, 
a  name  which  assumed  an  evil  omen  in  connection 
with  this  sad  history.  The  cup  of  Saul's  iniquity 
is  fast  filling;  he  is  to  perform  just  one  more  act 
of  open  rebellion  against  God  and  that  cup  will  be 
full.  It  is  a  solemn  moment  in  Saul's  checkered 
life.  He  is  crossing  the  boundary  line  between 
God's  patience  and  His  wrath.  God  help  us  all 
when  that  terrible  crisis  comes,  as  come  it  may, 
in  our  lives ! 

Saul  had  driven  out  those  who  practised  necro- 
mancy; perhaps  his  act  was  intended  in  some 
sense  as  an  atonement  for  his  many  forms  of  dis- 
obedience to  God.  As  we  now  see  him  his  condi- 
tion is  desperate.  He  is  forsaken  of  God  and  of 
men.  No  oracles  now  give  him  any  communica- 
tions of  God's  will.  Samuel  is  dead,  Samuel  on 
whom  he  had  leaned  in  so  many  crises  for  help, 
and  had  not  leaned  in  vain.  David  is  now  alien- 
ated, David  whose  dash  and  bravery,  love  and 
loyalty  had  so  often  spared  or  delivered  Saul  in 


DID   SAMUEL   APPEAR    WHEN  SUMMONED?   381 

times  of  great  danger.  There  is  one  witch  left  in 
the  land ;  and  we  are  now  to  see  in  Saul  a  strange 
mixture  of  superstition  and  religion  at-  this  trying 
moment.  He  asks  his  attendants  to  seek  out  for 
him  a  woman  who  had  a  familiar  spirit,  as  the 
vague  phrase  in  the  narrative  describes  her.  The 
expression  more  literally  is  "  a  mistress  of  the  Ob," 
a  name  which  is  derived  from  the  leathern  bag, 
sometimes  called  a  bottle,  used  in  magical  incan- 
tations, and  it  may  suggest  the  practice  of  ven- 
triloquism ;  the  Septuagint  translates  the  word  "  a 
ventriloquist."  Probably  the  name  *' Ob"  is  so 
given  because  it  was  supposed  that  the  spirit  or 
demon  which  possessed  the  necromancer  inflated 
the  body  so  that  it  protuberated  like  the  skin 
used  as  a  bottle.  The  Ob  of  the  Hebrews  was 
thus  exactly  similar  in  conception  to  the  Pytho  of 
the  Greeks,  and  the  name  might  be  used  both  for 
the  performer  and  for  the  spirit  which  was  sup- 
posed to  possess  him.  Sa'ul's  act  was  positively 
forbidden  by  the  law.  Lev.  xx.  6,  which  sentenced 
such  pretenders  to  death,  and  Saul  himself  had 
recently  enforced  this  law. 

Her  Residence. 

Near  Endor  such  a  woman  lived.  There  is  a 
Hebrew  tradition,  mentioned  by  Jerome,  that  she 
was  the  mother  of  Abner,  and  that  because  of  her 
relationship  to  him  she  escaped  the  general  mas- 
sacre of  the  necromancers  at  the  hands  of  Saul. 
Let  us  get  the  scene  clearly  in  mind.     The  armies 


382  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

are  in  full  sight  of  each  other ;  between  them  lies 
a  part  of  the  historic  plain  of  Esdraelon.  The 
sight  of  the  Philistines  filled  Saul  with  fear,  and 
so  we  read  that  "his  heart  trembled  greatly." 
He  is  alone  in  his  camp.  Neither  David,  Samuel, 
nor  God  was  now  on  his  side.  Neither  by  dreams, 
Urim,  nor  prophets  would  the  Lord  give  him  any 
answer.  His  suspense  was  terrible.  If  an  an- 
swer will  not  come  from  heaven,  perhaps  one  will 
come  from  hell.  Look  at  the  place  as  travellers 
see  it  to-day.  A  short  ride  from  Nain  brings  us 
to  Endor;  the  word  means  the  "Spring  of  Dor." 
This  spring  has  made  the  place  habitable  through 
all  the  centuries.  Here  are  found  to-day  a  few 
squalid  people  in  their  huts  of  stone  and  earth. 
Here  are  also  some  remarkable  caves ;  enter  these 
caves.  Behold  this  one;  it  is  roomy,  and  in  it 
observe  almost  at  any  moment  women  filling  their 
water-skins  or  jars.  The  walls  of  this  cave  are 
old,  seamed,  and  weird.  It  is  the  traditional 
place  of  the  abode  of  the  witch  of  Endor,  whom 
Saul  came  to  consult.  Wretched  old  women  may 
still  be  seen  coming  out  of  their  holes  or  caves  to 
stare  at  strangers  as  they  approach.  It  is  no  diffi- 
cult task  to  imagine  that  one  of  these  hags  repre- 
sents the  old  witch,  who  has  made  the  place 
famous  through  all  the  centuries  since  Saul's  visit. 
Saul's  journey  was  a  perilous  one;  but  the  out- 
ward danger  was  nothing  compared  to  the  horror 
of  great  darkness  which  filled  his  soul.  We  can 
still  trace  the  road  which  he  took.      He  must  have 


DID   SAMUEL   APPEAR    WHEN  SUMMONED?  383 

crossed  the  plain,  gone  round  the  left  tiank  of  the 
enemy,  ascended  the  ridge  of  Little  Hermon,  and 
then  have  gone  down  a  steep  descent  to  Endor. 

Meaning  of  the  Appearance. 

Was  the  scene  which  followed  a  genuine  appa- 
rition or  a  vulgar  imposture?  Volumes  have  been 
written  in  answer  to  that  question.  Many  cir- 
cumstances suggest  that  it  was  an  imposture. 
Saul  was  in  exactly  the  frame  of  mind  which  ex- 
posed him  to  an  imposition ;  he  was  weak,  excit- 
able, and  superstitious.  He  came  to  this  woman 
by  night ;  he  sees  her  alone,  his  attendants  being 
absent  although  near  at  hand.  It  is  easy  to  sup- 
pose that  one  of  his  servants  had  agreed  with  the 
woman  to  personate  Samuel.  The  narrative 
shows  us  that  Saul  did  not  see  any  appearance  of 
Samuel.  From  this  supposed  ghost  he  learned 
nothing  which  he  might  not  have  learned  from 
his  attendants,  except  the  words:  "To-morrow 
shalt  thou  and  thy  sons  be  with  me";  and  atten- 
tion has  been  called  by  several  critics  to  the  fact 
that  the  word  translated  "  to-morrow"  is  very  am- 
biguous, and  often  means  the  future  indefinitely. 

But  others  believe  that  Samuel  did  actually 
appear  to  Saul ;  and  possibly  it  will  be  admitted 
that  the  narrative  suggests  the  hypothesis  of 
some  kind  of  apparition.  Josephus  pronounces  a 
labored  eulogy  on  the  woman.  But  the  literal 
appearance  of  Samuel,  it  may  be  said  in  reply,  is 


384  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES, 

inconsistent  with  all  which  we  know  of  the  dead. 
Can  the  dead  assume  a  corporeal  shape?  Can 
they  converse  and  perform  other  acts  of  living 
beings?  Can  we  suppose  that  the  spirits  of  de- 
parted saints  are  amenable  to  the  call  of  every 
old  witch  who  chooses  to  dupe  gullible  men  and 
women?  Such  a  thought  is  incredible.  Heaven 
would  offer  few  attractions  if  saints  like  Samuel 
are  to  be  called  back  to  earth  by  witches  like  the 
woman  of  Endor.  Others  have  suggested  that 
the  woman  induced  Satan  or  some  other  evil 
spirit  to  personate  Samuel.  But  what  right  have 
we  to  assume  that  any  person  has  such  power 
over  Satan?  What  right  have  we  to  assume  that 
Satan  has  any  power  over,  or  any  relation  to,  de- 
parted saints  like  Samuel?  This  theory  is  not 
encouraging  to  saints  as  they  leave  this  earth. 

Is  it  not  better  to  suppose  that  God  permitted 
a  divine  impression  to  be  made,  partly  upon  the 
senses  of  Saul  and  partly  upon  those  of  the 
woman,  that  Saul  might  be  once  more  rebuked 
for  his  many  departures  from  God?  As  we  care- 
fully read  the  narrative  we  discover  that  Samuel 
appeared  before  the  woman  had  performed  any  of 
her  tricks  of  jugglery.  When  she  saw  Samuel  she 
was  utterly  amazed  and  cried  out  with  a  loud 
voice ;  and  thus  she  appears  to  have  been  as  much 
startled  as  was  Saul  himself.  There  seemed  to 
have  been  no  magical  formulae  employed  to  cause 
the  appearance,  or  to  give  her  ground  to  affirm 
an  appearance.     God  for  wise  purposes  seems  to 


1 


DID    SAMUEL  APPEAR    WHEN  SUMMONED?  385 

have  interposed,  and  to  have  given  the  woman  a 
vision  of  the  presence  of  Samuel ;  in  this  sense  that 
presence  was  real  to  her,  and  throug-h  her  state- 
ment real  to  Saul.  God  in  a  similar  way  moved 
upon  the  mind  of  Balaam  so  that  he  was  obliged 
to  bless  those  whom  Balak  desired  him  to  curse. 
The  hearts  of  all  men  and  women  are  under  the 
power  of  God ;  and  He  can  overrule  the  evil  of 
men  for  good.  The  woman  believed  that  she  saw 
Samuel,  but  Saul  saw  nothing.  He  simply  lis- 
tened to  the  woman's  description  of  a  god-like 
figure  of  an  aged  man  wrapped  in  the  royal  cloak 
or  sacred  robe,  an  appearance  like  that  of  gods, 
and  then  Saul  fell  the  whole  length  of  his  gigantic 
stature  on  the  ground,  and  so  remained  imtil  the 
woman  and  her  servants  forced  him  to  take  nour- 
ishment. The  woman  was  an  impostor,  and  Saul 
was  in  a  sense  her  victim,  but  God  overruled  the 
duplicity  of  the  one  and  the  superstition  of  the 
other  for  the  accomplishment  of  His  divine  pur- 
poses. 

The  Sad  Ending. 

Thus  Saul  heard  his  death-knell  rung  from  the 
world  of  spirits.  Back  through  the  darkness  he 
goes  with  his  sorrowful  heart  wellnigh  broken  in 
his  bosom.  What  a  night  he  must  have  passed ! 
The  day  dawns,  and  soon  he  is  rushing  into  battle. 
The  Philistines  poured  down  the  hill  on  the  one 
side,  and  the  Israelites  were  forced  up  the  hill 
slopes.  The  battle  was  sore  against  Saul;  the 
archers  hit  him,  and  he  was  mortally  wounded. 
25 


3^^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

He  fought  with  the  valor  of  despair.  At  his 
feet  Jonathan  and  his  other  sons  lay  dead.  Saul 
sought  death,  but  it  came  not  to  his  relief.  He  is 
faint  and  dizzy  with  the  darkness  and  weakness  of 
the  approaching  end.  Fearing  that  he  might  be 
the  sport  of  the  Philistines  if  captured,  he  begs 
his  armor- bearer  to  thrust  him  through  with  the 
sword.  But  respect  for  his  fallen  master  pre- 
vents tlie  servant  from  granting  this  boon.  Be- 
hold Saul  fixing  his  sword  into  the  blood-stained 
ground,  and  see  him  falling  upon  it  with  the 
courage  of  despair !  Now  he  lies  in  pain  smeared 
with  his  own  blood.  A  wild  Amalekite,  wander- 
ing over  the  upland  waste  seeking  plunder,  sees 
the  dying  king  and  at  that  king's  request  he  puts 
him  out  of  pain,  giving  him  the  coup  de  grace. 
He  then  took  off  the  royal  diadem  and  bracelet 
and  carried  them  with  the  news  of  Saul's  death 
to  David.  The  Philistines  found  the  body  on  the 
morrow,  and  stripped  and  decapitated  it.  The 
armor  was  sent  into  the  Philistine  cities,  and  ap- 
parently deposited  in  a  temple  at  Bethshan ;  and 
on  the  walls  of  the  same  city  was  hung  the  naked 
and  headless  body  of  Saul,  together  with  the 
corpses  of  his  three  sons.  The  body  was  removed 
from  Bethshan  by  the  gratitude  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Jabesh  Gilead,  who  did  not  forget  the  kindness 
done  them  by  Saul  in  the  beautiful  days  of  his 
early  kingship.  They  came  over  the  Jordan  by 
night,  took  down  the  bodies,  burned  their  flesh, 
and  then  buried  the  bones  under  a  tamarisk  at 


DTD    SAMUEL   APPEAR    WHEN  SUMMONED?   387 

Jabesh.  David  finally  removed  Saul's  ashes  and 
those  of  Jonathan  to  their  ancestral  sepulchre  at 
Zelah  in  Benjamin. 

There  is  no  more  melancholy  character  in  Bible 
history  than  that  of  Saul.  There  was  in  him  much 
that  elicited  admiration  and  evoked  enthusiasm. 
But  his  rashness  was  controlled  neither  by  sense 
nor  conscience.  The  naturally  fierce  spirit  of 
the  tribe  of  Benjamin  developed  in  him  into 
uncontrollable  ferocity.  The  naturally  strong- 
affection  manifested  toward  David  and  Jonathan 
was  perverted  into  bitter  wrath,  which  finally  de- 
veloped into  insanity.  The  zeal  which  was  un- 
controlled became  disobedience  toward  God,  and 
this  disobedience  was  the  cause  of  all  his  disasters. 
Those  who  reject  God  will  believe  in  witcnes. 
Men  who  are  too  incredulous  to  believe  in  the 
Bible  will  believe  in  the  ravings  of  ignorant,  vul- 
gar, and  lying  spiritual  mediums  and  fortune- 
tellers. There  is  no  depth  too  low  for  men  who 
turn  away  from  God,  from  purity,  from  truth, 
and  from  the  Bible.  The  whole  law  of  God  is 
summed  up  by  the  divine  Lord  in  the  two  great 
principles  which  are  universal  as  gravitation  and 
eternal  as  God :  *'  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and 
with  all  thy  might.  This  is  the  first  and  great 
commandment.  And  the  second  is  like  unto  it ; 
thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  On  these 
two  commandments  hang  all  the  law  and  the 
prophets." 


XXIII. 

DID     TWO     SHE-BEARS     DESTROY     FORTY- 
TWO   CHILDREN? 


XXIII. 

DID  TWO  SHE-BEARS  DESTROY  FORTY- 
TWO   CHILDREN? 

The  narrative  of  this  incident  in  the  life  of 
Elisha  is  found  in  2  Kings  ii.  23-25.  The  belief 
that  two  she-bears,  as  a  part  of  the  curse  of  Elisha 
on  the  derisive  children  at  Bethel,  utterly  de- 
stroyed forty-tuo  of  these  young  people  has 
greatly  perplexed  many  Bible  readers,  and  has 
utterly  offended  others,  who  desire  to  accept  un- 
questioningly  the  Bible  narrative.  Recently  at  a 
great  assembly  of  Sunday-school  teachers  in  this 
city  a  rector  of  one  of  the  churches  unreservedly 
affirmed  that  this  incident  was  not  authentic,  that 
it  was  an  interpolation,  and  that,  without  the 
slightest  doubt,  the  event  never  occurred.  His 
affirmations  and  the  doubts  engendered  in  the 
minds  of  many  Christian  people  are  largely,  if 
not  entirely,  caused  by  a  misinterpretation  of  the 
ancient  story.  It  is  most  unfortunate  that  many 
readers  of  the  Bible  have  confounded  false  inter- 
pretations with  true  revelations;  it  ought  to  be 
clearly  seen  that  their  objections  are  not  really 
against  the  Bible  narrative,  but  against  incorrect 
explanations  of  that  narrative. 

Let  us  "  fetch  a  compass"  and  approach  this  in- 


392  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES'. 

cident  so  that  its  salient  features  may  be  discov- 
ered and  emphasized.  Elisha  was  the  successor 
of  Elijah  as  the  leader  in  the  prophetical  office. 
As  such  a  leader  it  was  fitting  that  he  should  visit 
the  school  of  the  prophets  which  was  at  Bethel. 
This  place,  it  will  be  remembered,  was  then  a 
chief  seat  of  the  illegal  and  idolatrous  calf  wor- 
ship. Elisha  is  on  his  way  from  Jericho  to  Mount 
Carmel  as  he  visits  Bethel.  In  company  with 
Elijah  he  had  made  his  last  visit  to  that  historic 
town,  when  these  two  famous  men  were  taking 
their  memorable  journey  before  Elijah's  transla- 
tion. We  now  approach  the  story  at  which  many 
have  taken  offence.  They  have  considered  it  un- 
worthy of  the  great  prophet ;  they  have  even  de- 
clared that  it  was  immoral  on  Elisha 's  part  to 
pronounce  a  curse  on  these  derisive  youths.  As 
Elisha  approaches  Bethel  we  see  these  youths 
clustered  near  the  entrance  to  the  town,  as  is  the 
manner  of  the  idle  crowds  in  Palestine  to  this 
day.  The  incident  which  is  about  to  occur  is 
recognized  at  once  as  altogether  unlike  the  life 
and  spirit  of  Elisha,  and  as  more  nearly  resem- 
bling those  of  Elijah.  We  have  here  the  one  case 
of  severity  in  a  life  remarkable  for  its  gentleness 
and  beneficence ;  but  a  clear  understanding  of  the 
facts  in  the  case  will  remove  many  of  the  difficul- 
ties with  which  the  story  is  associated  in  the 
minds  even  of  devout  readers  of  the  Bible. 


DID    SIIK-BEARS  DESTROY  CHILDREN?     393 

Not  Irresponsible  Children. 

We  are  not  for  a  moment  to  suppose  that  these 
derisive  youths  were  little  boys,  merely  irrespon- 
sible children,  indulging  in  a  childish  prank  as 
Elisha  approached  the  town.  If  we  examine 
closely  the  words  which  they  uttered,  as  well  as 
the  conduct  which  they  manifested,  we  shall 
clearly  see  that  their  abusive  epithets  were  not 
born  of  a  mere  childish  freak.  They  knew  well 
what  they  were  doing;  they  belonged  to  a  city 
which  was  the  centre  of  an  abominable  apostasy. 
Because  of  its  bad  pre-eminence  Bethel,  meaning 
"house  of  God,"  was  called  Bethaven,  meaning 
"  house  of  the  idol. "  These  youths  incarnated  the 
spirit  and  manifested  the  temper  which  we  might 
naturally  expect  from  the  offspring  of  confirmed 
and  aggressive  apostates  from  God.  They  were 
not,  as  already  affirmed,  irresponsible  little  chil- 
dren. The  objectors  to  this  narrative  generally 
assume  that  these  were  children,  perhaps  from  six 
to  ten  years  of  age ;  but  nothing  could  be  farther 
removed  from  the  facts  in  the  case.  The  original 
terms  are  iicariin  ketanim^  which  ma}^  mean  young 
men  in  the  strength  and  vigor  of  their  early  man- 
hood. Naar^  the  singular  form  of  the  word  of 
which  fiearim  is  the  plural,  signifies  not  only  a 
child,  but  a  young  man,  a  servant,  a  soldier,  one 
actually  fit  to  go  out  to  battle.  Isaac  is  called 
iiaar  when  it  is  believed  he  was  twenty-eight 
years  old;    and  Joseph   was  also   called    by  this 


394  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

name  when,  according;  to  some  authorities,  he  was 
thirty-nine  years  old.  The  word  is  applied  to  the 
soldiers  who  served  as  a  body-gnard  to  Ahab. 
It  is  also  applied  to  Solomon  when  he  was  at  least 
twenty  years  old,  at  the  time  when  he  began  to 
reign;  and  Jeremiah  uses  the  word  of  himself 
when  he  was  called  to  be  a  prophet.  Those  who 
translate  the  original  terms  by  the  phrase  "  young 
people"  are  probably  entirel}^  correct.  It  is  quite 
certain  that  the  terms  could  appropriately  be  used 
of  those  who  had  reached  the  period  of  early 
manhood,  and  who  might  be  of  different  ages 
within  that  limit.  We  still  speak  of  the  Hebrews 
as  the  "children  of  Israel";  and  different  words 
in  the  Hebrew  translated  children  have  a  great 
breadth  of  meaning. 

It  is  thus  evident  that  those  who  mocked  Elisha 
were  fully  accountable  for  their  abusive  and  ir- 
reverent language.  If  this  fact  had  been  held 
constantly  in  mind  it  would  have  entirely  dis- 
armed many  of  the  severest  critics  of  this  ancient 
story.  They  have,  as  already  implied,  supposed 
that  these  were  thoughtless,  sportive,  prankish, 
and  merely  fun-loving  little  children.  Because 
of  this  misconception  as  to  their  age  the  critics 
have  been  disposed  to  consider  that  their  offence 
was  very  light,  and  so  their  punishment  was 
extremely  severe.  Thus  the  opposers  of  the 
narrative  have  affirmed,  because  of  these  miscon- 
ceptions, that  there  was  no  proper  proportion  be- 
tween the  crime  committed  and  the  punishment 


DTD    SHE-BEARS  DESTROY   CHILDREN?     395 

inflicted.  It  has  thus  come  to  pass  that  rather 
than  believe  that  divine  revelation  was  responsible 
for  so  great  an  injustice  many  earnest  Christians, 
as  well  as  hostile  critics,  have  rejected  the  narra- 
tive as  an  unauthoritative  tradition  or  an  unfor- 
tunate interpolation. 

Meaning  of  the  Insolent  Epithet. 

"  Go  up,  thou  bald  head ;  go  up,  thou  bald 
head."  The  original  words  thus  translated  are 
aleJi  karcacJi^  and  they  are  the  language  of  gross- 
est insult.  Some  have  supposed  that  these 
words  are  equivalent  to,  "  Ascend,  thou  empty 
skull,  to  heaven,"  implying  that  these  youths 
knew  of  Elijah's  translation.  If  this  be  the 
meaning,  their  language  was  blasphemy  against 
God,  and  the  punishment  of  these  Bethelite  idol- 
aters was  light  compared  with  their  crime.  If 
this  be  the  significance  of  the  language,  then 
great  scorn  is  cast  upon  the  ascension  of  Elijah. 
But  this  is  probably  not  the  correct  interpreta- 
tion. Many  authorities  affirm  that  the  word 
translated  "go  up"  does  not  mean  "ascend,"  in 
the  sense  in  which  the  ascension  of  Elijah  took 
place.  In  addition  to  this  consideration,  it  is  not 
at  all  probable  that  these  young  people  could  have 
heard  at  this  time  of  the  ascension  of  Elijah. 
The  language  of  the  sixteenth  verse  clearly  sug- 
gests that  even  the  disciples  of  the  prophet  had 
not  yet  learned  of  the  translatior^  of  their  great 
master. 


39^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Let  lis  get  the  scene  clearly  in  mind.  We  see 
these  young  Bethelite  defamers  clustered  about 
the  entrance  to  their  city.  They  behold  Elisha 
at  a  distance  as  he  approaches;  they  recognize 
him  by  the  prophet's  mantle.  It  was  probably 
the  mantle  which  Elijah  had  worn,  and  which  he 
had  left  behind  him  as  he  ascended ;  it  was,  there- 
fore, in  a  peculiar  sense  the  symbol  of  the  pro- 
phetic office.  They  recognized  Elisha  as  an  ear- 
nest opponent  of  the  calf  worship  to  which  they 
were  devoted,  and  of  which  Bethel  in  a  special 
sense  was  the  headquarters.  They  watch  Elisha 
ascending  the  hill  and  approaching  their  city. 
They  have  come  out  probably  as  an  organized 
band ;  they  certainly  were  a  numerous  group,  for 
if  forty-two  were  injured  by  the  bears  there  must 
have  been  more  than  that  number  in  the  entire 
company.  They  now  call  to  Elisha  in  mockery, 
Aleli  kareacJi^  "  Go  up,  thou  bald  head."  It  is  as  if 
they  had  said,  "  Be  off,  thou  prophet  of  God ;  we 
do  not  want  your  presence  in  our  city ;  let  us  be 
rid  alike  of  God  and  His  prophet."  The  word 
which  is  here  translated  "  bald  head"  is  a  peculiar 
term,  and  it  strictly  describes  shortness  of  hair  at 
the  back  of  the  head ;  it  is  distinct  from  another 
term  w^hich  describes  baldness  at  the  front  of  the 
head.  The  term  does  not  necessarily  affirm  actual 
baldness.  These  youths  could  not  notice  the  con- 
dition of  Elisha  in  that  regard,  as  they  were  now 
seeing  him  at  a  distance.  It  is  true  that  Elisha 
might  have  been   prematurely  bald.     We   know, 


DID    SIIE-BEARS  DESTROY   CHILDREA^?     397 

liowever,  that  he  lived  lon^,^  after  this  event ;  but 
his  baldness,  if  it  existed,  as  already  suggested, 
could  not  have  been  observed  by  these  youths 
when  they  uttered  their  opprobrious  language. 
It  is  quite  well  known  that  there  could  have  been 
no  artificial  baldness  of  the  head  caused  by  shav- 
ing, as  the  law  forbade  those  who  were  conse- 
crated to  the  service  of  God  from  shaving  the  hair 
of  the  head.  Probably  the  language  attributed 
some  form  of  moral  culpability  to  Elisha;  for 
baldness  was  often  regarded  as  the  sign  of  leprosy, 
or  as  the  result  of  some  form  of  moral  dishonor. 
The  epithet  was,  therefore,  implicative  of  moral 
disgrace,  and  was  thus  a  great  reproach  to  Elisha 
as  a  man  of  God.  Attention  has  been  called  to 
the  fact  that  the  tonsure  among  the  Roman  priests 
was  long  considered  in  many  countries  not  as  a 
mark  of  consecration  and  holiness,  but  rather  as 
a  symbol  of  moral  impurity.  It  is  absolutely  cer- 
tain that  the  language  applied  to  Elisha  was  the 
keenest  sort  of  scornful  epithet  when  uttered 
against  him  as  a  prophet  of  the  true  God.  We 
have  not,  therefore,  here  an  exhibition  of  the 
mere  wantonness  of  ordinary  irreverence  of  boys 
for  age  or  worthy  character;  we  have  rather  a 
premeditated  dishonor  and  a  stinging  insult  to 
Elisha  as  the  prophet  and  minister  of  the  most 
high  God.  The  scorn  of  these  wicked  youths  was 
not  so  much  against  Elisha  as  a  man,  but  upon  his 
calling  as  a  prophet.  These  defamers  were  de- 
spising Jehovah  Himself.      Elisha  was  simply  the 


39^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

ambassador  of  God,  and  as  such  God  rather  than 
Elisha  was  the  object  of  insult.  His  short- 
trimmed  locks  differed  so  widely  from  the  shaggy 
hair  of  Elijah,  which  streamed  down  his  shoulders, 
that  the  youths  considered  him  and  his  claims  to 
prophetship  on  that  account,  as  well  as  because 
of  their  aversion  to  God  and  His  worship,  as  a  fit 
subject  for  denial  and  insult.  We  have  thus  dis- 
honor cast  upon  God,  and  upon  the  office  of 
prophet  in  the  caustic  language  hurled  at  Elisha. 

Elisha's  "  Curse." 

This  part  of  the  narrative  has  been  subjected  to 
severe  criticism.  We  must  not  suppose  that 
Elisha  ill  a  petulant  humor,  and  certainly  not  in 
the  spirit  of  personal  revenge,  declared  God's 
punishment  of  the  sin  committed.  As  God's 
prophet  he  was  making  his  first  appearance  in 
Bethel.  He  could  not  allow  this  open  mockery 
to  pass  in  silence.  Had  he  permitted  these  boys 
to  go  unrebuked  he  would  have  practically  denied 
his  holy  calling,  and  would  have  dishonored  his 
divine  Master.  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States  cannot  allow  an}'  form  of  dishonor  to  be 
given  to  their  ambassadors  in  any  land ;  for  these 
ambassadors  represent  the  dignity,  honor,  and 
power  of  their  respective  governments.  Elisha 
was  the  representative  of  the  great  God  in  the 
midst  of  the  worshippers  of  calves,  and  the  honor 
of  God  was  involved  in  the  honor  of  His  prophet. 


DID   SHE-BEARS  DESTROY   CHILDREN?     399 

But  what  do  we  mean  by  Elisha's  curse?  What 
did  Elisha  do?  Certainly  he  did  nothing  more 
and  nothing  other  than  to  declare  the  divine  judg- 
ment on  the  wicked  spirit  and  language  of  these 
youths.  He  spoke  in  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
bcsJicin  Jehovah^  by  the  name  or  authority  of 
Jehovah.  It  is  certain  that  Elisha  had  no  power 
in  or  of  himself  to  inflict  the  punishment  which 
came  upon  these  deriders  of  God;  he  could  not 
cause  bears  to  come  out  of  the  wood.  All  that 
Elisha  could  do  was  to  declare  the  punishment 
upon  these  sinful  youths;  and  certainly  Elisha 
could  do  nothing  less.  It  is  to  be  said  regarding 
this  part,  and  all  parts  of  the  narrative,  that  pos- 
sibly something  is  omitted  in  the  record  as  we 
have  it,  or  some  expression  has  greatly  changed 
its  meaning  since  the  record  was  made,  and  so 
difficulties  in  the  narrative  are  multiplied.  It  is 
almost  certain  that  if  additional  facts  were  given 
all  apparent  disproportion  between  the  offence 
and  the  punishment,  and  regarding  every  other 
difficulty  in  the  narrative,  would  entirely  disap- 
pear. 

The  Punishment  Inflicted. 

What  was  the  punishment  thus  inflicted  on 
these  derisive  and  irreverent  youths.''  We  are 
told  that  there  "  came  forth  two  she-bears  out  of 
the  wood  and  tare  forty  and  two  children  of 
them."  To  this  hour,  as  many  travellers  have 
observed,  the  road  to  Bethel  winds  up  the  defile, 


400  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFEICULTIES. 

and  under  the  hill  there  are  ruins  which  are  sup- 
posed to  be  those  of  Ai.  There  are  still  some 
trees  found  in  this  vicinity;  but  in  Elisha's  day 
the  neighborhood  was  marked  by  a  thick  forest 
which  was  the  home  of  wild  beasts.  We  are  now 
dealing,  let  it  be  carefully  remembered,  with  the 
judgment  of  God  which  befell  these  depraved 
youths.  God  had  distinctly  said :  "  I  will  also  send 
wild  beasts  among  you,  which  shall  rob  you  of 
your  children  and  destroy  your  cattle,  and  your 
highways  shall  be  desolate."  When  did  these 
bears  come  forth  in  relation  to  the  time  of  the  com- 
mittal of  the  offence  by  these  young  people?  We 
are  not  told ;  the  time  may  have  been  long  after- 
ward. Regarding  this  matter  it  is  impossible  to 
make  an  affirmation.  But  frankness  compels  us 
to  say  that  the  natural  impression  of  the  narrative 
is  that  this  result  happened  soon  after  the  mock- 
ery by  the  youths  took  place.  Why  are  we  dis- 
tinctly told  that  the  instruments  of  the  punish- 
ment were  "  she-bears"?  There  must  be  a  reason 
for  this  characterization,  otherwise  any  bears 
might  have  served  the  divine  purpose  in  the  in- 
fliction of  merited  punishment.  We  know  that 
she-bears  are  particularly  fierce ;  especially  when 
robbed  of  their  whelps  are  they  peculiarly  raven- 
ous. To  this  fact  frequent  reference  is  made  in 
Scripture.  It  is  not  at  all  impossible  that  these 
forty-two  youths  who  were  thus  injured,  in  a 
spirit  of  recklessness  while  employed  in  the  wood 
may  have   robbed  these   bears  of    their    young. 


DID   SHE-BEARS  DESTROY   CHILDREN?     401 

The  bears  having  been  robbed  may  have  been  in 
the  traek  of  these  youths  at  the  time  they  insulted 
the  prophet.  God's  providence  easily  could  have 
ordered  this  natural  occurrence  so  as  to  give  it  the 
effect  of  a  divine  cause,  as  indeed  it  was.  Accord- 
ing to  this  conjecture,  the  bears  were  filled  with 
wrath  for  the  loss  they  had  sustained,  and  the  jus- 
tice of  God  readily  could  guide  them  to  the  group 
of  the  insulting  and  blasphemous  youths. 

But  what  was  the  extent  of  the  punishment  in- 
flicted? Much  depends,  in  the  correct  interpreta- 
tion of  the  narrative,  upon  a  right  answer  to  this 
question;  and  at  this  point  careless  readers  and 
traditional  interpreters  have  greatly  erred.  They 
assume  that  forty-two  of  these  youths  were  killed. 
How  do  we  know  that  they  were  killed?  It  ought 
to  be  constantly  affirmed  that  it  is  not  asserted  in 
this  narrative  that  these  bears  ate  forty-two,  or 
two,  or  even  one  of  these  reviling  young  people. 
The  word  means  only  that  the  bears  rent,  or  tore, 
to  a  greater  or  less  degree,  forty-two  of  these  in- 
solent youths.  The  word  is  used  with  consider- 
able breadth  of  meaning  in  different  connections. 
Perhaps  nothing  more  is  asserted  than  that  the 
flesh  was  torn,  possibly  only  the  clothing;  and 
there  is  a  bare  possibility  that  simply  the  group 
was  torn  asunder,  scattered  pell-mell  in  every 
direction ;  although  the  special  references  to  the 
forty-two  would  indicate  that  something  happened 
to  them  which  did  not  occur  to  others  of  the  num- 
ber. The  natural  impression  is  that  an  injury  of 
26 


402  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

some  serious  kind  was  inflicted,  although  its  ex- 
tent cannot  be  accurately  learned  from  the  word 
employed;  but  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  it  is 
not  here  affirmed  that  even  one  child  was  killed. 
This  fact  ought  to  be  emphasized  whenever  the 
story  is  discussed.  It  is  a  thousand  pities  that 
meanings  have  been  put  into  this  word  "tare" 
which  it  will  not  bear  and  which  its  connections 
nowhere  suggest.  The  true  explanation  of  the 
word  tare  relieves  the  narrative  of  the  supposed 
disproportion  between  the  crime  committed  and 
the  punishment  inflicted. 

Lessons. 

This  story  of  the  olden  time  is  suggestive  of  les- 
sons for  modern  life  and  daily  duty.  It  is  always 
a  serious  thing  to  reproach  any  person  for  infirmi- 
ties or  deformities.  It  is  still  more  so  to  attribute 
physical  or  moral  defects  where  they  do  not  exist. 
Those  who  reproach  a  man  because  he  is  a  servant 
of  the  most  high  God  blaspheme  God  whose  ser- 
vant he  is.  There  are  times  when  righteous  wrath 
is  not  only  justifiable  but  its  absence  would  be 
culpable.  The  nobler  the  soul  and  the  purer  the 
heart  the  more  quickly  will  they  flash  out  against 
injustice  to  God  or  man,  and  against  moral  wrong 
wherever  found.  God  always  has  at  hand  the 
means  of  punishing  the  guilty.  He  has  hidden 
resources  in  the  soil  to  destroy  the  doomed  cities 
of  the  plain.  He  has  bears  in  the  woods  in  leash 
waiting   for   the   command   to   injure  irreverent 


DID    SHE-BEARS  DESTROY   CHILDREN?     403 

youths.  He  has  in  earth  and  air,  in  sea  and  sky, 
forces  of  nature  which  in  harmony  with  natural 
law  will  inflict  inevitable  punishment  upon  all  the 
violators  of  His  law.  No  wicked  words,  no  irrev- 
erent acts,  no  unholy  thoughts  escape  the  notice 
of  the  great  God  of  heaven  and  earth.  When  the 
furious  Saul  persecuted  the  believers  in  Jesus  he 
persecuted  Jesus  Himself.  He  who  defames  the 
prophets  of  God,  or  offends  even  the  little  ones 
who  believe  in  Jesus,  strikes  a  blow  at  the  majesty 
of  heaven  and  gives  sorrow  to  the  heart  of  the  lov- 
ing Saviour.  God's  feeblest  saints  are  dear  to 
Him  as  the  apple  of  the  eye ;  the  names  of  His 
lowliest  children  are  written  in  the  palms  of  His 
hands,  and  every  time  the  hands  are  opened  He 
sees  their  names,  and  as  often  as  the  hands  are 
closed  all  the  forces  of  heaven  and  earth  are  em- 
ployed for  their  protection. 


XXIV. 
THE   DESTRUCTION   OF  THE   CANAANITES. 


XXIV. 

THE    DESTRUCTION    OF    THE     CANAAN- 
ITES. 

WAS  the  destruction  of  the  Canaanites  justifia- 
ble? In  the  judgment  of  many  earnest 
students,  the  moral  difficulties  in  the  Book  of 
Joshua  are  greater  than  are  the  astronomical  dif- 
ficulties. The  destruction  of  the  Canaanites  by  the 
command  of  God,  and  through  the  instrumentality 
of  Joshua,  has  been  a  subject  of  frequent  attacks 
by  infidels  upon  the  morality  of  the  Bible  and  upon 
the  character  of  God.  We  all  know  that  even  the 
most  earnest  believers  are  often  perplexed  by  the 
moral  problems  arising  out  of  this  subject  and  de- 
manding solution.  Why  did  God  command,  or 
even  permit,  this  destruction?  How  could  such 
massacres  occur  without  utterly  demoralizing  the 
people  responsible  therefor?  How  could  a  book 
claiming  to  be  divine  even  seem  to  indorse  such 
terrible  slaughters?  These  questions  demand  our 
careful  consideration,  and  to  them  alleviative  an- 
swers can  be  given. 

Character  of  the  Age. 
The  age  was  one  in  which  might  made  right, 
God  has  revealed  Himself  to  men  in  sundry  parts 


4o8  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

as  men  were  able  to  receive  the  revelation.  That 
God  commanded  the  extermination  of  the  Canaan- 
ites  is  most  certain.  In  Deuteronomy  we  read : 
"  Thou  shalt  save  alive  nothing  that  breatheth ; 
but  thou  shalt  utterly  destroy  them,"  and  the  rea- 
son assigned  for  this  command  is,  "  That  they 
teach  you  not  to  do  after  all  their  abominations." 
Is  such  a  command  in  harmony  with  the  divine 
attributes  of  justice  and  mercy?  God  has  to  do — 
it  is  said  reverently — the  best  He  can  with  the 
material  in  His  hand.  The  age  of  Joshua  was 
characterized  by  great  ignorance  of  God.  Thus 
there  was  a  low  ethical  standard  among  men. 
Men  were  savage  and  brutal ;  acts  were  then  per- 
mitted, and  even  commanded,  which  would  have 
been  utterly  prohibited  under  the  Gospel  dispen- 
sation. Men  had  not  then  learned  to  say:  "Our 
Father,  who  art  in  heaven" ;  and  being  ignorant 
of  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  they  were  correspond- 
ingly ignorant  of  the  brotherhood  of  man.  The 
spirit  of  mercy  inculcated  by  Christ  was  entirely 
unknown  in  that  rude  time.  It  is  quite  unfair, 
as  we  shall  later  fully  see,  to  carry  back  from  the 
New  Testament  the  morality  there  taught,  and 
apply  it  to  the  conduct  and  character  of  men  who 
did  not  have  the  full  and  blessed  light  of  this 
highest  revelation  of  God.  It  was  also  a  time 
when  property  belonged  to  communities  rather 
than  to  individuals.  Communities  were,  there- 
fore, held  responsible  for  the  acts  performed  by 
their   representatives.      Punishment    of    nations 


DESTRUCTION   OF    THE    CANAANITES.     409 

was  in  harmony  with  the  forms  of  justice  then 
prevailing.  Joshua  believed  himself  to  be  the 
minister  of  God  in  the  punishment  of  the  Canaan- 
ites.  He  was  what  the  courts  and  officers  of  the 
law  are  in  our  day.  Have  they  right  to  pro- 
nounce judgment  and  to  take  life?  Joshua  had  a 
higher  right  in  both  respects;  he  was  God's  di- 
rect instrument.  The  Israelites  were  in  a  sense 
responsible  for  the  morality  of  the  Canaanites; 
and  frequent  rebukes  by  God  were  administered 
to  the  Israelites  for  not  having  more  fully  obeyed 
His  command  in  the  punishment  of  His  and  their 
enemies. 

It  was  also  the  practice  in  that  day  among  all 
nations  to  put  to  death  all  prisoners  taken  in  war. 
The  humanity  of  our  time  is  the  development  of 
thousands  of  years  of  Christian  teaching.  It 
must  ever  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  commands 
of  God  through  Moses  were  greatly  in  advance  of 
the  moral  education  of  the  world  at  that  time. 
Never  was  a  leader  of  conquering  armies  less 
governed  by  selfish  motives  and  unholy  ambitions 
than  was  the  brave  and  noble  Joshua.  Compared 
with  Alexander  the  Great,  Caesar,  Charles  V., 
Philip  II.,  or  Napoleon,  Josuha  appears  conspicu- 
ous for  noble  character,  selfless  motives,  and  relig- 
ious consecration.  Men  must  alwa5^s  be  judged 
with  reference  to  the  standard  of  morality  of  the 
times  in  which  they  lived.  Moses  and  Joshua 
were  far  in  advance  of  the  moral  standard  of  their 
age ;  they  were  the  unworldly  and  godly  men  of 


4IO  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIEFICULTIES. 

their  time.  The  charge  rightly  made  against  Co- 
lumbus is,  that  he  lived  below  the  highest  stand- 
ard of  his  time ;  a  similar  charge  might  be  made 
against  some  of  the  practices  of  the  Puritans,  even 
after  they  came  to  the  New  World.  All  students 
of  history  must  admit  that  the  Jewish  religion 
never  introduced  barbarism  into  the  world;  on 
the  contrary,  it  greatly  softened  the  spirit  of  cru- 
elty wherever  it  was  established.  Such  conquer- 
ors as  the  Assyrians,  Babylonians,  and  Persians 
were  far  less  merciful  than  was  Joshua.  The 
Greeks  and  Romans  stained  the  progress  of  their 
armies  by  crimes  from  which  Joshua  was  entirely 
free.  These  classic  nations  did  not  hesitate  to 
dedicate  captive  women  to  the  impure  worship  of 
Aphrodite  or  Mylitta.  The  violation  of  women 
was  almost  universal  in  the  case  of  towns  sacked 
by  armies  of  the  earlier  heathen,  and  even  of 
later  Christian  days.  Goths,  Vandals,  Huns,  Bul- 
garians, and  Turks,  frequently  surpassed  Joshua 
in  their  pitiless  cruelties.  The  conduct  of  the 
Duke  of  Alva,  Philip  of  Spain,  and  the  Pope  of 
Rome  in  relation  to  the  Netherlands  was  vastly 
more  abominable,  in  their  various  forms  of  atroc- 
ity, than  was  the  conquest  of  Joshua  over  the 
Canaanites. 

This  a  General  Problem. 

How  could  God,  we  ma)^  ask,  permit  the  bar- 
barities of  pagan  Rome  against  the  early  Chris- 
tians?    How   could    God    permit    the  still    more 


i 


DESTRUCTION  OF    THE    CANAANITES.     411 

awful  crimes  of  Papal  Rome  against  those  whom 
that  church  called  heretics?  How  could  God,  in 
comparatively  recent  days,  permit  the  satanic 
atrocities  of  the  Spanish  Inquisition?  How  could 
the  nations  of  Europe  and  the  republic  of  Amer- 
ica permit  the  hadean  slaughter  of  the  Armenians 
by  the  Kurds  and  the  Turks?  How  could  the 
American  republic  long,  without  effective  pro- 
test, permit  the  nameless  cruelties  of  a  Weyler  in 
Cuba?  We  do  not,  indeed,  answer  one  difficulty 
by  suggesting  other  difficulties ;  but  we  show,  at 
least,  that  the  problem  is  not  peculiar  to  Joshua 
or  the  Bible. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  often  apparent  se- 
verit}^  is  the  truest  leniency  in  war.  The  storm- 
ing of  Drogheda  in  Ireland  by  Cromwell  has  been 
fiercely  criticised,  but  his  act  received  justifica- 
tion not  only  in  his  own  day,  but  in  our  time  as 
well.  Carlyle  affirms  that,  terrible  as  was  Oliver's 
surgery,  it  prevented  greater  suffering  by  bring- 
ing the  war  to  a  speedy  end ;  in  this  respect  it 
was  more  merciful  than  would  have  been  a  gen- 
tler course.  Cromwell  was  himself  convinced 
that  his  severity  "  prevented  the  effusion  of  blood 
for  the  future."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  his  stern- 
ness speedily  ended  the  Irish  war.  The  conduct 
of  the  British  armies  in  suppressing  the  Sepoy 
atrocities  in  the  Indian  mutiny  is  a  case  in  point. 
It  was  not  in  wanton  cruelty  that  General  Neill 
tied  Sepoys  to  the  mouths  of  cannons,  and  then 
fired  the   cannons,  and   shot  the  cruel  wretches 


412  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

into  fragments,  thus  inflicting  apparently  shock- 
ing forms  of  cruelty.  He  took  advantage  of  a 
prevalent  superstition  among  the  Sepoys  to  the 
effect  that  the  bodies  thus  mutilated  would  suffer 
additional  humiliation  and  torture  in  the  world  to 
come.  His  act  struck  a  degree  of  terror  into  the 
hearts  of  the  rebels  such  as  it  is  difficult  for  us  to 
comprehend.  It  largely  overthrew  the  rebellion. 
For  every  Sepoy  thus  put  to  death,  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  at  least  five  hundred  lives  were  saved. 
It  is  also  certain  that  if  the  Israelites  had  fol- 
lowed up  their  first  successes  by  similar  crushing 
victories,  they  would  have  speedily  become  mas- 
ters of  Palestine,  and  would  thus  have  saved  many 
lives  and  averted  many  moral  evils. 

Guilt  of  the  Canaanites. 

V/e  ought  also  to  remember  that  the  Canaanites 
were  guilty  of  the  most  abominable  crimes  con- 
ceivable by  the  human  mind.  They  sinned 
against  the  light  of  nature,  against  the  example 
of  the  patriarchs,  and  against  the  warnings  given 
by  God  in  the  punishment  of  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
rah. In  His  commands  against  them  God  was 
but  expressing  His  indignation  against  horrible 
forms  of  vice.  We  have  only  to  turn  to  the  Book 
of  Leviticus  to  see  the  awful  catalogue  of  abomi- 
nations, which,  we  are  distinctly  told,  were  com- 
mitted by  the  people  of  the  land.  Some  forms  of 
their  crimes  were  long  punishable  by  death  in 
Great  Britain  and  in  her  colonies.      This  writer 


DESTRUCTION   OF    THE    CANAANITES.     4^3 

once  saw  a  young-  man  on  trial  for  his  life  under 
the  forms  of  Britisli  law,  charged  with  one  of  the 
crimes  of  which  tlic  Canaanitcs  were  guilty.  No 
words  are  too  strong  to  express  the  indignation 
which  all  true  men  must  feel  against  the  nameless 
crimes  committed  by  these  beastly  Canaanites. 
Indeed,  it  is  unfair  to  animals  to  put  them  in  the 
same  category  with  the  inhabitants  of  the  land 
which  the  Israelites  came  to  conquer.  When 
Israel  refused  to  destroy  these  pamperers  of  vice, 
she  lapsed  into  their  idolatrous  and  lustful  prac- 
tices; she  even  sacrificed  children  on  the  altars 
of  Moloch.  Thus  it  was  that  their  religion  was 
degrading  beyond  description.  When  fifteen 
hundred  years  later  some  of  their  practices  were 
introduced  into  Rome,  the  satirists  of  that  day 
regarded  the  advent  of  these  vices  as  an  enormous 
calamity.  These  Canaanites  knew  of  God's  won- 
ders in  Egypt  and  of  the  victories  over  the  kings 
of  Gilead  and  Bashan.  They  knew  that  God  had 
chastised  the  Hebrews  for  participating  in  the 
abominations  of  Baal-Peor.  We  know  that  Ra- 
hab  informed  the  spies  that  she  had  known  of 
God's  mighty  judgment;  so,  doubtless,  did  oth- 
ers. She  repented  and  was  saved,  and  perhaps  a 
goodly  number  of  others  also  repented  and  were 
saved.  All  might  thus  have  been  saved.  God 
might  indeed  have  punished  the  Canaanites  by 
the  operation  of  natural  laws ;  He  does  punish  in 
that  way  violators  of  moral  laws  in  our  day.  No 
man  can  escape  these  laws;  they  follow  him  as 


414  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

does  his  shadow.  But  if  God  had  punished  the 
Canaanites  by  epidemics,  by  pestilence,  or  by 
some  other  display  of  His  righteous  wrath,  His 
abhorrence  of  sin  would  not  have  been  so  clearly 
shown  as  when  He  used  the  Israelites  as  the  in- 
struments of  His  righteous  anger.  Nature  in- 
flicts its  wrath  now  upon  weak  women  and  harm- 
less children,  and  whatever  charge  may  be  made 
against  the  God  of  revelation  must  also  be  made 
against  the  God  of  nature. 

A  General  Law. 

Let  it  further  be  remarked  that  the  nation  that 
will  not  conform  to  the  highest  civilization  of  its 
time  will  by  that  civilization  be  destroyed.  This 
statement  is  the  formulation  of  a  law  universal  as 
God  and  irresistible  as  gravitation.  God  was  now 
about  to  introduce  the  fullest  manifestation  of  His 
kingdom  yet  given  to  men;  and  He  required  a 
territory  from  which  evil  influences  were  absent 
for  the  display  of  His  great  purposes.  Similar 
truths  are  illustrated  in  America.  God  had  great 
purposes  in  the  establishment  of  the  American 
republic.  But  in  order  that  Pilgrim  and  Puritan 
fathers  might  have  an  appropriate  sphere  for 
planting  and  developing  the  great  principles  of 
American  civilization  and  Christianity,  the  Indian 
had  to  be  driven  back  from  his  former  hunting- 
ground.  The  process  has  continued  until  this 
day.     The  Indian's  territory  was  demanded  for  a 


DESTRUCTION   OF    THE    CANAANITES.     4^5 

hii^fher  civilization,  and  for  that  purpose,  by  va- 
rious providential  combinations,  it  was  taken. 
The  Indian  has  been  driven  back  and  back  almost 
to  the  other  edge  of  the  continent.  The  process 
will  go  on  until  he  is  either  civilized  or  extermi- 
nated. Doubtless,  great  cruelties  have  been  prac- 
tised against  the  Indian  on  our  own  continent; 
doubtless,  solemn  treaties  have  been  broken,  and 
the  white  man  has  been  guilty  of  much  injustice 
toward  his  red  brother.  Nevertheless  there  is 
divine  justice  and  an  inevitable  necessity  in  the 
operation  of  the  law  that  nations  that  will  not 
submit  to  the  highest  civilization  of  their  time 
shall  by  that  ver)^  civilization  be  destroyed.  The 
greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  necessitates 
the  execution  of  this  apparently  severe  but  uni- 
versal and  eternal  law.  Dr.  Arnold  rightly 
teaches  us  that  "  The  Israelites'  sword,  in  its 
bloodiest  executions,  wrought  a  work  of  mercy  for 
all  the  countries  of  the  earth,  to  the  very  end  of 
the  world." 

As  a  final  consideration,  it  is  to  be  remembered 
that  there  is  an  anger  which  is  not  sinful.  In- 
deed, the  tenderer  men  are  the  more  righteously 
wrathful  do  they  become  against  wrong  wherever 
found.  He  is  only  a  being  of  paste  and  putty 
whose  anger  does  not  flash  out  against  certain 
crimes  committed  against  God  and  man.  Jesus 
was  a  terrible  Preacher  against  the  hypocrites  of 
His  day.  There  are  times  in  which  even  the 
holiest  souls  find  appropriate  vehicles  in  the  im- 


41 6  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

precatory  Psalms  for  the  expression  of  their  high- 
est thought.  Dean  Stanley  calls  attention  to  the 
fact  that  during  the  Sepoy  rebellion  the  Book  of 
Joshua  was  read  in  the  churches  with  a  great 
sense  of  appropriateness.  There  is  need  to-day 
of  certain  phases  of  the  moral  indignation  against 
evil  expressed  in  many  of  the  Psalms  and  illus- 
trated in  the  conduct  of  Joshua  and  the  Israelites. 
Let  us  be  modest  in  passing  judgment  upon  those 
who  had  to  deal  with  the  abominable  cruelties 
and  indescribable  impurities  which  the  Moabites 
committed  in  honor  of  Chemosh,  and  the  Philis- 
tines in  honor  of  Dagon.  Let  us  not  be  wiser 
than  God.  Only  the  man  who  is  wiser,  tenderer, 
purer,  and  holier  than  God  may  presume  to  criti- 
cise God.  God  had  His  purpose  all  through  this 
bloody  period.  His  people  fought  not  simply 
against  the  enemies  of  Israel,  but  against  the 
enemies  of  humanity.  We  to  this  hour  are  reap- 
ing good  fruit  from  the  seed  which  they  sowed, 
though  they  often  sowed  it  amid  tears  and  blood. 


XXV. 

ARE    THE    IMPRECATORY    PSALMS   JUSTIFI- 
ABLE  OR   EVEN   EXPLICABLE? 


I 


XXV. 

ARE    THE    IMPRECATORY    PSALMS    JUS- 
TIFIABLE   OR    EVEN    EXPLICABLE? 

Bv  the  Imprecatory  Psalms  we  mean  those 
psahns  in  which  the  author  invokes  curses  upon 
his  enemies,  and  does  this  in  a  real  or  apparent 
spirit  of  vindictiveness.  In  some  of  the  psalms 
to  which  this  title  is  applied  the  author  seems  to 
take  positive  delight  in  the  suffering  of  his  foes. 
Some  psalms  in  their  entirety  are  usually  classed 
as  imprecatory;  and  parts  of  other  psalms  bear 
this  title.  It  is  believed  by  competent  critics  that 
the  psalms  which  are  most  intensely  imprecatory 
bear  strong  marks  of  the  authorship  of  David. 
The  following  are  among  the  psalms  or  parts  of 
psalms  to  which  the  title  imprecatory  is  generally 
applied ;  these  are  not,  indeed,  all  the  psalms  that 
could  be  selected  of  this  class,  but  they  are  fair 
specimens  of  the  spirit  and  style  of  all  the  psalms 
to  which  this  title  can  properly  be  given ;  of  the 
entire  psalms  usually  classed  as  maledictory  the 
following  maybe  named:  Pss.  xxxv.,  Iviii.,  lix., 
Ixix. ,  and  cix.  Parts  of  other  psalms  are  usually 
placed  in  this  category:  Pss.  iii.  7;  v.  10;  ix.  2- 
4;  X.  15;  xviii.  37-43;  xxviii.  4;  xxxi.  17;  xxxv. 
3-8;  xxxvii.   12-15;  xl.    14;  Iii.  5-7;  Iv.    9,   15,  23; 


420  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Iviii.  6-10;  lix.  12-15;  Ixiii.  9-1 1;  Ixiv.  7-9;  Ixviii. 
2;  Ixix.  22-25;  Ixxix.  12;  Ixxxiii.  9-17;  cix.  6- 
15;  cxxxvii.  7-9.  In  some  of  these  passages,  es- 
pecially cix.  6-1 1  and  cxxxvii.  8,  9,  the  maledic- 
tory spirit  is  very  marked. 

No  one  can  deny  that  these  portions  of  Holy 
Scripture  have  seriously  perplexed  devout  readers, 
and  that  they  have  also  furnished  plausible  objec- 
tions to  those  who  deny  the  inspiration  of  these 
psalms.  Some  of  these  psalms  breathe  a  spirit  of 
revenge  and  malice  apparently  inconsistent  with 
all  our  ideas  of  true  religion ;  indeed,  some  of  them 
shock  sensitive  readers,  and  startle  those  who  are 
not  sensitive.  It  has  been  gravely  proposed  by 
men  not  lacking  in  devoutness  that  an  expurgated 
edition  of  the  psalter  should  be  prepared  for  gen- 
eral use,  an  edition  which  should  omit  all  psalms 
possessing  this  maledictory  spirit.  Various  theo- 
ries have  been  propounded  by  scholars  in  different 
countries  and  centuries  to  explain  the  presence 
of  these  psalms,  and  portions  of  psalms,  in  a  book 
claiming  to  be  directly  from  God.  No  one  will 
deny  that  the  difficulty  connected  with  their  pres- 
ence in  such  a  volume  is  real  and  great.  Perhaps 
it  is  impossible  entirely  to  remove  these  difficul- 
ties. Difficulties,  however,  of  many  kinds  are 
not  peculiar  to  the  Bible  as  a  revelation  from 
God;  difficulties  are  found  in  natural  science,  in 
mental  philosophy,  and  in  practical  morals  which 
we  cannot  entirely  remove.  But  although  all 
difficulties  connected  with  the  imprecatory  psalms 


THE   IMPKECATORY  PSALMS.  42 1 

cannot  be  removed,  it  is  quite  certain  that  some 
really  alleviative  suggestions  can  readily  be  made. 

Alleviative  Explanations. 

It  is  quite  certain  that  some  critics  have  greatly 
exaggerated  the  spirit  of  vindictiveness  recog- 
nized by  all  in  some  parts  of  the  psalter ;  but  it 
ought  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  really  very  few  of 
the  psalms  possess  this  characteristic.  Dean 
Stanley  in  his  lectures  on  the  Jewish  church,  vol. 
ii.,  p.  170,  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  out  of 
one  hundred  and  fifty  psalms  in  the  psalter,  only 
four  are  specially  marked  as  possessing  a  vindic- 
\.\\Q  spirit.  In  this  connection  we  ought  to  em- 
phasize the  fact  that  much  importance  should  be 
attached  to  the  natural  vehemence  of  expression 
among  the  Orientals,  as  compared  with  the  habits 
of  thought  and  language  on  the  part  of  those  liv- 
ing in  cooler  climates  and  possessing  different 
characteristics.  It  is  absolutely  certain  that  much 
that  is  supposed  in  these  psalms  to  be  harsh  and 
vindictive  may  be  referred  to  the  spirit  of  the  age 
in  which  the  psalms  were  written,  and  to  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  writers  themselves.  Critics  of 
all  kinds  of  literature  ought  to  judge  an  author 
by  the  standards  of  his  own  age  and  place,  and 
not  by  standards  of  our  time  and  place.  We  con- 
stantly apply  these  principles  to  the  Greek  and 
Latin  poets,  to  the  records  of  knight-errantry  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  to  the  language  of  Covenanters 


42  2  OLD    TESTAMENT  DTFEICULTIES. 

and  Puritans,  and,  indeed,  to  authors  of  all  times 
and  places.  It  is  certain  that  Biblical  authors 
are  equally  entitled  to  the  application  of  this  prin- 
ciple of  literary  criticism.  It  is  quite  certain 
that  often  uneducated  men  who  use  rough  and 
seemingly  harsh  words  mean  to  express  no  more 
harsh  and  cruel  feeling  than  other  men  express  in 
the  smooth  tones  and  courtly  phrases  of  a  more 
refined  culture.  He  is  an  unfair  critic,  to  judge 
the  subject  purely  on  literary  grounds,  who  re- 
fuses in  his  study  of  the  imprecatory  psalms  to 
give  due  weight  to  the  genius  of  Hebrew  poetry 
and  the  spirit  of  the  age  in  w^hich  David  lived. 
The  true  critic  will  always  strive  to  distinguish 
between  an  author's  real  meaning  and  the  color 
which  his  mental  habit,  national  education,  and 
immediate  environment  give  to  that  expression. 
Except  this  principle  be  constantly  borne  in  mind, 
we  shall  pass  an  utterly  false  judgment  on  the 
Covenanters  of  Scotland  and  the  Puritans  both  of 
Old  and  New  England.  David  certainly  is  en- 
titled to  a  fair  application  of  this  conspicuously 
fair  principle  of  literary  criticism.  We  all  know 
that  the  Oriental,  even  to  this  day,  uses  extremely 
strong  language  for  the  expression  even  of  ordi- 
nary feeling  and  opinion.  When  Europeans 
would  express  the  idea  that  God  loves  men,  they 
use  a  simple  statement  to  that  effect ;  but  when 
the  Asiatic  prophet  expresses  the  same  idea  he 
says:  "Thy  maker  is  thy  husband";  and  he 
further  expresses  the  idea  by  referring  to  the  joy 


THE  IMP  RE  CA  TOR  V  P  SA  IMS.  423 

of  the  bridegroom  over  the  bride  as  illustrative 
of  God's  joy  in  His  people.  These  statements  are 
almost  objectionable  because  of  the  amatory  ele- 
ment which  the  Occidental  discovers ;  but  the  form 
of  expression  was  most  natural  and  proper  to  the 
Oriental.  In  like  manner  the  Oriental  expresses 
his  sense  of  justice  in  language  equally  strong. 
The  apparently  terrific  denunciations  of  the 
psalmist  meant  nothing  more  to  him  than  lan- 
guage which  we  often  use  without  offending  the 
most  sensitive  readers.  This  principle  of  criti- 
cism ought  carefully  to  be  applied  to  the  writings 
of  all  Oriental  poets  and  prophets.  Many  oppo- 
nents of  the  Bible  have  been  guilty  of  great  un- 
fairness because  of  their  failure  to  recognize  this 
eminently  appropriate  principle  in  their  interpre- 
tation of  the  psalter  and  other  portions  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

Some  have  found  an  alleviative  interpretation 
in  the  opinion  that  some  of  the  imprecatory  psalms 
are  predictive  rather  than  maledictive.  This  in- 
terpretation implies  that  the  imprecations  state 
what  would  be  rather  than  what  the  writer  desired 
should  be.  But  this  view  must  not  be  pressed 
unduly.  The  more  careful  study  of  the  Hebrew 
original  in  these  recent  times  does  not  warrant 
this  view,  except  possibly  in  a  very  limited  appli- 
cation. The  scholarship  of  an  earlier  day  made 
some  of  the  passages  to  be  rendered  in  the  future 
rather  than  in  the  imperative ;  possibly  in  some 
cases  the  laws  of  the  Hebrew  language  will  per- 


42  4  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

mit  this  interpretation.  So  far  as  this  explana- 
tion is  permissible,  the  idea  is  that  the  punishment 
denounced  is  what  sinners  deserved  rather  than 
what  the  writer  desired  on  their  account.  This 
language  is  predictive  rather  than  imprecative. 
It  expresses  what,  in  the  operation  of  natural 
laws  with  which  we  are  all  familiar,  is  sure  to  fol- 
low a  course  of  evil  conduct.  Sin  will  be  followed 
by  sorrow;  what  a  man  sows  that  shall  he  as- 
suredly reap.  We  cannot  separate  between  sin 
and  punishment;  punishment  will  follow  sin  as 
the  shadow  follows  substances  in  the  sunshine. 
But  even  if  this  interpretation  is  applicable  to  a 
few  passages  the  most  serious  difficulties  still  re- 
main, as  this  explanation  will  not  meet  all  the 
cases.  It  is  quite  certain  that  in  some  passages 
there  is  an  expression  of  feeling,  of  desire,  of 
pleasure  in  the  invocation  of  terrible  calamities 
upon  the  enemies  of  the  writer.  This  is  at  best  a 
timid  way  of  dealing  with  real  difficulties.  Can 
this  vindictive  spirit  be  reconciled  with  the  char- 
acter of  Christianity?  Is  it  in  harmony  with  any 
form  of  revealed  religion?  These  are  most  seri- 
ous questions,  and  they  deserve  the  most  careful 
consideration. 

An  alleviative  interpretation  has  been  sug- 
gested on  the  ground  that  the  duty  of  forgiving 
enemies  is  not  distinctly  taught  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. But  this  is  not  a  tenable  position.  The 
Jewish  Scriptures  condemn  a  spirit  of  revenge. 
It  would  be  easy  to  quote  passages  from  Exodus, 


THE   IMPRECATORY  PSALMS.  425 

Leviticus,  Proverbs,  and  from  still  other  portions 
of  the  Old  Testament  to  show  that  even  these 
Scriptures  did  enjoin  the  requiting  of  evil  with 
good.  It  is  also  true  that  David  recognized  this 
obligation,  and  was  himself  frequently  a  noble  il- 
lustration of  the  spirit  of  magnanimity  toward  his 
foes.  It  is  to  be  said  that  in  some  cases  the  writer 
of  these  malefic  passages  merely  records  the  feel- 
ings of  others,  and  in  those  cases  he  is  not  to  be 
held  responsible  for  the  language  emplo3^ed. 
This  explanation  covers  a  number  of  cases,  and 
some  of  them  those  of  the  most  serious  character. 
The  writer  merely  expresses  the  gratification 
which  others  would  feel  in  seeing  vengeance  in- 
flicted on  their  enemies,  even  though  that  ven- 
geance should  come  in  the  most  cruel  forms.  In 
these  cases  all  that  the  writer,  or  the  Spirit  of  in- 
spiration, is  responsible  for  is  the  correctness  of 
the  record.  The  writer  is  merely  telling  the  story 
of  the  cruelty  of  others,  and  is  not  expressing 
any  cruel  feelings  of  his  own.  In  Genesis  xxxiv. 
25-29,  xlix.  6,  7,  the  inspired  writer  gives  a  record 
of  the  cruelty  of  the  sons  of  Jacob ;  so  in  2  Sam. 
xii.  31,  we  have  simply  a  statement  of  the  cruelty 
which  had  been  inflicted  and  for  which  the  writer 
had  no  responsibility  whatever.  One  of  the  most 
startling  of  the  imprecatory  passages  is  the  one 
in  Psalm  cxxxvii.  8,  9 ;  this  passage  has  shocked 
many  devout  students  of  the  psalter;  but  it  is 
simply  a  statement  of  the  actual  feelings  of  those 
who  should  wreak  vengeance  on  Babylon.     The 


426  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

pride  and  arrogance  of  Babylon  had  been  so  great 
that  we  can  well  suppose  many  who  should  see 
her  terribly  punished  would  have  the  utmost  sat- 
isfaction, even  though  that  punishment  were  sav- 
age and  barbarous  in  the  extreme.  But  there  is 
nothing  in  this  record  necessarily  to  show  that  the 
author  of  the  psalms  rejoiced  in  the  infliction  of 
that  punishment.  This  solution  of  the  difficulty 
will  certainly  apply  to  some  of  the  imprecatory 
passages.  It  is  quite  certain  that  Mr.  Motley,  in 
writing  of  the  cruelties  of  Alva  in  the  Nether- 
lands, or  of  the  Inquisition  in  Spain,  or  any  re- 
cent writer  speaking  of  the  satanism  of  Weyler  in 
Cuba,  must  not  be  supposed  as  sympathizing  with 
the  cruelty  which  he  describes.  This  explanation 
will  not  apply  to  all  the  objectionable  passages,  but 
it  certainly  does  to  a  number  of  them,  and  is  an 
explanation  to  which  due  weight  should  be  given. 

Still  Other  Alleviations. 

It  has  been  proposed  by  some  writers  to  explain 
these  imprecations  on  the  ground  that  they  are 
the  language  natural  to  the  human  heart,  lan- 
guage which  naturally  and  actually  occurred  to 
the  mind  of  the  psalmist  but  which  is  not  com- 
mended to  us  for  imitation.  Inspiration  is  not 
omniscience ;  inspiration  is  not  perfection.  The 
spirit  of  inspiration  is  not  responsible  for  wicked 
thoughts  on  the  part  of  the  psalmist,  any  more 
than  it  is  responsible  for  wicked  acts  on  the  part 


THE  IMPRECATORY  PSALMS.  427 

of  Abraham,  Jacob,  David,  or  Peter.  The  biog- 
raphy of  other  men  in  the  Bible  clearl}^  shows 
that  they  were  guilty  of  acts  which  must  be  con- 
demned even  by  their  own  standards  of  morality. 
If  inspired  men  may  do  selfish  and  resentful  acts, 
they  may  also  speak  passionate  and  unrighteous 
words.  The  Scripture  is  always  honest  in  its 
statem.ents  even  regarding  eminent  servants  of 
God.  It  palliates  nothing ;  it  dares  tell  the  whole 
truth.  Without  doubt  this  illustration  of  truth- 
fulness on  the  part  of  the  Bible  is  an  element  of 
its  great  power.  It  does  not  present  to  us  the  life 
of  the  most  distinguished  saint  as  free  from 
struggles  with  sins  and  temptations.  It  does  not 
give  us  the  highest  forms  of  religion  conceivable, 
but  it  represents  its  noblest  men  as  struggling  with 
manifold  temptations  and  so  working  out  a  noble 
character.  The  failings  even  of  Moses,  David, 
and  Peter  have  given  encouragement  and  inspira- 
tion to  all  subsequent  ages,  even  as  the  heroic 
morality  of  Joseph  and  the  unfaltering  courage  of 
Daniel  have  rebuked  weakness  and  encouraged 
fidelity  and  loyalty.  Thus  the  psalmist  does  not 
select  simply  his  highest  emotions  and  his  noblest 
aspirations  for  exhibition  in  his  writings ;  but  he 
gives  a  true  picture  of  his  own  heart  in  its  various 
struggles  against  evil  and  toward  good.  The 
psalmist  was  only  partially  sanctified.  No  true 
view  of  inspiration  requires  us  to  deny  that  vin- 
dictive feelings  might  arise  in  the  mind  of  an  in- 
spired poet  and  a  partially  sanctified  king.      Tlij 


428  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

Bible  frankly  admits  David's  great  sins.  The  re- 
ligious emotions  of  the  best  men  are  mingled  with 
impcrfeetions.  The  spirit  of  inspiration  is  not 
responsible  for  these  feelings,  any  more  than  for 
the  evil  acts  of  those  whose  lives  are  recorded ;  it 
is  responsible  simply  for  a  correct  record  of  these 
feelings  and  acts.  These  portions  of  the  writer's 
feelings  are  not  given  for  our  imitation.  Inspira- 
tion is  not  sanctification.  Balaam  uttered  true, 
gloAving,  and  sublime  prophecies,  and  yet  Balaam 
was  in  many  respects  a  bad  man.  No  man  \vill 
deny  that  such  men  as  Augustine,  Luther,  Me- 
lanchthon,  Calvin,  Knox,  and  scores  more  in 
earlier  and  later  days,  were  at  times  guilty  of  un- 
christian feeling  and  unholy  action.  It  should 
constantly  be  borne  in  mind  that  perfection  is  un- 
known even  among  the  greatest  saints  of  all  ages 
and  climes.  A  man  may  be  a  true  historian  and 
not  be  in  the  full  sense  a  true  man. 

A  very  helpful  alleviative  interpretation  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  David  identifies  the  enemies 
of  God  with  his  own  enemies.  The  critics  of 
these  portions  of  the  psalter  have  largely  forgot- 
ten this  fact,  but  it  is  a  fact  that  ought  never  to 
be  forgotten.  David  speaks  not  so  much  against 
the  enemies  of  David  as  against  the  enemies  of 
David's  Lord.  He  well  expresses  his  own  spirit 
when  he  says :  "  Do  I  not  hate  them,  O  Lord, 
that  hate  thee?"  "I  hate  them  with  perfect 
hatred;  I  count  them  mine  enemies."  The 
author  of  the  article  on   the   Psalms  in   Smith's 


THE   IMPRECATORY  PSALMS.  429 

Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  in  illustrating-  this  point, 
calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  even  Catiline  had 
insight  enough  to  say,  "  An  identity  of  wishes  and 
aversions,  this  alone  is  true  friendship."  Apply- 
ing this  test  to  David  in  his  relations  to  God,  we 
can  see  that  the  union  between  them  was  such 
that  all  God's  enemies  David  regarded  as  his  own 
personal  foes.  David  was  in  a  sublime  sense 
God's  representative;  the  honor  of  God's  name 
and  the  glory  of  God's  kingdom  were  in  a  marvel- 
lous way  committed  to  the  care  of  David.  In  re- 
quiting the  wrongs  of  his  Lord  and  King  he  for- 
got his  own  wrongs  as  committed  against  himself, 
and  thought  of  them  only  as  committed  against 
his  God.  An  American  or  British  ambassador  at 
a  foreign  court  may  entirely  lose  sight  of  an 
attack  upon  himself,  and  consider  it  simply  as 
aimed  at  the  government  whose  representative 
at  that  court  he  is.  David's  zeal  for  God  made 
all  God's  enemies  in  some  sense  his  own  enemies. 
It  has  been  well  said,  by  the  writer  to  v/hich  allu- 
sion has  just  been  made,  that  it  was  when  David 
felt  God's  honor  to  be  insulted  that  he  rose  to  so 
lofty  a  vengeance  as  to  express  himself  thus : 

"  That  thy  foot  may  be  dipped  in  the  blood  of  thine  enemies. 
And  the  tongue  of  thy  dogs  in  the  same, " 

Many  other  similar  examples  of  the  manifesta- 
tion of  this  spirit  could  readily  be  given.  David 
rises  to  his  noblest  strains  of  righteous  wrath  when 
he  is  defending  God's  honor  and  is  entirely  for- 


430  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

getful  of  his  own  personal  wrongs.  It  would  be 
easy  to  quote  passages  from  these  psalms  showing 
his  kindness,  gentleness,  and  forgiveness  toward 
his  own  foes.  There  is  a  striking  illustration  of 
this  spirit  in  Psalm  xxxv.  12,  13  :  "  They  rewarded 
me  evil  for  good  to  the  spoiling  of  my  sonl.  But 
as  for  me,  when  they  were  sick  my  clothing  was 
sackcloth;  I  humbled  my  soul  with  fasting;  and 
my  prayer  returned  into  mine  own  bosom." 

Two  Strong  Alleviations. 

We  must  recognize  the  fact  that  in  the  impreca- 
tory psalms  a  righteous  indignation  is  often  ex- 
pressed, a  sense  of  outraged  justice  here  finds 
voice.  All  true  men  must  admit  that  there  are 
times  when  the  spirit  of  forbearance  must  give 
place  to  the  spirit  of  righteous  indignation.  The 
holier  the  soul  the  hotter  at  times  will  be  this  spirit, 
and  the  stronger  will  be  its  expression.  It  has 
often  been  remarked  that  in  the  study  of  the  Sa- 
tanic Inquisition  in  Spain,  of  the  horrible  St. 
Bartholomew  massacre,  and  of  the  terrible  Smith- 
field  fires,  even  the  gentlest  spirit  finds  the  im- 
precatory psalms  an  appropriate  vehicle  of  ex- 
pression. The  humblest  and  most  devout  saints 
in  India  during  the  Sepoy  rebelb'on  found  solid 
comfort  in  reading  these  portions  of  the  psalter. 
Many  of  us  during  the  fearful  massacres  in  Ar- 
menia and  still  later  in  Cuba  sympathized  with 
the  spirit  of  these  Christians  in  India,  and  found 


THE   IMPRECATORY  PSALMS.  431 

corresponding  comfort  in  these  maledictory  pray- 
ers. As  one  thinks  of  the  devilish  spirit  of  the 
liquor  traffic  he  ma}'  without  sin,  in  some  mod- 
ified sense,  use  these  psalms  as  expressive  of 
his  feeling.  There  is  an  indignation  which  is 
righteous ;  there  is  an  anger  that  is  sinless.  The 
holier  the  soul  the  greater  will  this  indignant  and 
righteous  anger  be.  He  is  made  of  paste  and 
putty  whose  spirit  does  not  flame  forth  in  indig- 
nant wrath  against  forms  of  sin  unfortunately  too 
common  in  every  walk  of  life.  It  has  been  well 
said  that  David  was  the  Milton  and  Cromwell  of 
his  time ;  he  fought  the  earthly  battles  of  his  Lord 
and  Master.  We  do  not  feel  that  Milton  showed 
an  un-Christian  spirit  w^hen^  catching  the  echo  of 
David's  lyre,  he  sang: 

"Avenge,  O  Lord,  thy  slaughtered  saints,  whose  bones 
Lie  scattered  on  the  Alpine  mountains  cold." 

We  must  also  bear  in  mind  that  David  was  a 
magistrate,  was  a  king,  and  was  in  a  real  sense 
the  representative  of  God.  It  was  a  part  of  his 
function  to  discover  and  arraign  the  guilty  and  to 
dispense  justice.  We  cannot  deny  that  in  certain 
conditions  punishment  is  right.  A  law  without  a 
penalty  is  not  law,  but  simply  advice.  Account 
for  it  as  we  may,  there  is  something  in  our  nature 
which  approves  of  the  infliction  of  penalty  when 
crime  has  clearly  been  committed.  The  whole 
theory  of  government  recognizes  the  necessity  for 
arrangements  for  detecting  and  punishing  crime. 


432  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

We  thus  have  an  array  of  constables,  jurymen, 
and  judges.  Is  it  not  lawful  for  a  detective,  or  a 
constable,  or  a  keeper  of  a  prison  to  pray  that  he 
may  discover  the  guilty  and  inflict  the  appro- 
priate punishment?  Could  not  a  detective  officer 
in  his  private  devotions  or  at  his  family  altar  offer 
a  prayer  that  he  should  be  successful  in  discover- 
ing and  punishing  fiendish  criminals?  Could  not 
David  appropriately  offer  a  similar  prayer?  Is 
not  his  prayer  in  its  essence  simply  that  justice 
may  be  done  and  that  righteous  punishment  may 
be  inflicted?  It  cannot  be  proved  tha,t  there  is  in 
the  imprecator}^  psalms  any  more  malice  than 
might  be  found  in  the  heart  of  an  officer  of  the 
law  even  in  our  day  when  he  is  endeavoring  to  do 
his  duty  in  capturing  and  punishing  criminals. 
The  nobler  the  student  of  Scripture  the  more 
readily  will  he  see  that  even  the  imprecatory 
psalms  have  some  place  in  human  life,  and  so  in 
divine  revelation.  It  is  not  an  evidence  of  a  high 
spiritual  conception  that  finds  no  place  for  the 
resistance  to  evil,  and  for  the  avengement  of 
wrong,  which  is  found  in  this  portion  of  the 
psalter.  All  that  is  manliest  in  human  nature  and 
divinest  in  God  will  at  times  flame  forth  in  de- 
nouncement of  evil  and  in  vindication  of  the  right. 
It  ought  to  be  borne  further  in  mind  that  what- 
ever difficulty  exists  regarding  the  imprecatory 
psalms  is  a  difficulty  created  by  the  Bible  itself. 
The  sacred  writers  have  given  us  this  record.  It 
is  clearly  seen  in  the  Bible  that  all  its  parts  have 


THE   IMPRECATORY  PSALMS.  433 

their  own  method  of  denouncing  sin.  In  the  his- 
torical books  sin  is  denounced  by  simply  showing 
its  effects  in  harmony  with  natural  law.  Its 
results  in  national  character  are  seen  in  the  loss 
of  vigor  and  nobility,  and  in  the  final  enslavement 
of  the  people.  The  prophets  denounce  it  with 
tremendous  rhetorical  vigor.  If  one  will  read 
the  anathemas  of  Isaiah,  Amos,  and  other  proph- 
ets with  this  thought  in  mind  he  will  see  that 
David's  imprecations  are  comparatively  mild  and 
gentle.  No  one  uttered  more  fearful  "  woes"  than 
fell  from  the  lips  of  the  loving  Saviour.  He 
spoke  with  a  breadth  of  application  and  intensity 
of  meaning  which  David  could  not  understand. 
The  purer  and  diviner  the  character  of  Christ  the 
severer  and  fiercer  the  imprecations  He  uttered. 
Let  it  then  never  be  forgotten  that  David  spoke 
rather  of  God's  enemies  than  of  his  own.  The 
Bible  w^th  the  utmost  candor  gives  us  the  record. 
Its  writers  indulged  in  no  feelings  which  they 
were  unwilling  to  record.  If  we  condemn  these 
imprecations,  we  ought  to  remember  that  the 
spirit  which  leads  to  their  condemnation  has  come 
from  the  Bible  itself.  The  Bible  is  one  book  ;  all 
its  parts  are  one  revelation  from  God.  We  must 
judge  its  writings  as  a  whole.  Men  and  books 
must  be  criticised  in  their  entirety.  It  is  quite 
unfair  to  judge  either  by  their  beginning  and  not 
by  their  ending.  Thus  it  will  come  to  pass  that 
the  entire  book,  when  rightly  understood,  is  seen 

to  be  harmonious, 
28 


434  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

We  have  thus  seen  that  there  are  many  allevia- 
tions of  these  difficulties.  The  nobler  the  soul 
the  more  easy  will  he  find  it  to  interpret  these 
imprecations.  When  right  is  on  the  cross  and 
wrong-  is  on  the  throne,  when  the  wicked  oppose 
and  those  who  should  be  valiant  for  truth  are 
silent,  then  noble  souls  in  the  fires  of  persecution 
catch  the  true  spirit  of  the  imprecatory  psalms. 
In  the  day  of  peace  and  sunshine  dilettante  fol- 
lowers of  Christ  may  seem  shocked  at  the  strong 
language  and  apparently  vindictive  spirit  of  these 
psalms ;  but  in  the  day  of  terrific  trial  between 
right  and  wrong,  good  and  evil,  Christ  and  Satan, 
a  holy  resentment  may  become  the  divinest  of 
emotions.  Let  us  make  due  allowance  for  the 
Orientalism  in  the  diction  of  these  imprecations, 
for  the  heroic  spirit  of  resistance  to  evil  in  the 
heart  of  the  psalmist,  and  for  the  sublime  identi- 
fication of  his  enemies  with  God's  foes,  and  many 
of  these  apparently  insuperable  difficulties  will 
vanish.  Let  us  not  claim  to  be  holier  than  was 
David,  gentler  than  was  Jesus,  diviner  than  have 
been  thousands  of  white-souled  saints  through  the 
ages,  who  at  times  of  righteous  indignation  have 
found  these  psalms  in  harmony  with  the  tenderest 
love,  the  saintliest  desire,  and  the  holiest  aspira- 
tion. 


XXVI. 
JONAH   AND    HIS   BOOK. 


X^ 


XXVI. 

JONAH    AND    HIS    BOOK. 

No  book  in  the  Bible  has  been  so  vigorously 
assailed  by  infidels  as  the  book  of  Jonah,  and  thus 
many  of  the  most  beautiful  lessons  which  the 
book  teaches  have  been  entirely  forgotten  in  the 
criticism  to  which  it  has  been  subjected.  This 
story,  regarded  simply  as  literature,  is  one  of  the 
most  interesting  short  stories  in  any  language. 
No  book  of  the  Old  Testament  so  clearly  teaches 
the  lesson  of  universal  brotherhood  as  does  the 
book  of  Jonah.  In  portions  of  the  book  of  Isaiah 
this  lesson  is  taught,  but  with  nothing  like  the 
emphasis  given  it  in  the  book  of  Jonah.  God  re- 
bukes the  exclusiveness  of  the  prophet  and  the 
narrowness  of  the  Jews,  and  throws  the  mantle  of 
His  loving-kindness  and  forgiving  mercy  over  the 
nation  that  cruelly  hated  the  Jewish  people.  The 
lesson  of  human  brotherhood  taught  in  the  book 
of  Jonah  anticipates  the  presentation  of  that  great 
truth  given  by  our  Lord  and  by  the  Apostle  Paul. 
In  this  respect  the  book  of  Jonah  is  unique  among 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  great  ma- 
jority of  critics  almost  entirely  overlook  this  sub- 
lime truth    in    their  carping  criticisms  and  cav- 


43^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

illing  disputations.  Jonah  was  really  the  first 
foreign  missionary;  he  carried  the  message  of 
mercy  to  a  heathen  people. 

Groundless    Reasoning. 

They  are  utterly  at  fault  who  affirm  that  if 
the  historical  character  of  the  book  of  Jonah  is 
disproved,  then  Christianity  itself  is  destroyed. 
Those  who  so  speak  are  guilty  of  unpardonable 
looseness  of  thinking.  They  practically  affirm 
that  if  Jonah  goes,  the  Bible  goes  and  Jesus  goes. 
No  man  is  warranted  in  making  so  exaggerated 
and  so  reasonless  a  statement  as  that;  indeed,  it 
is  difficult  to  understand  how  a  man  with  a  grain 
of  common  sense  in  relation  to  such  matters  can 
make  such  a  statement.  Those  who  so  affirm 
make  the  historical  interpretation  of  the  book  of 
Jonah  of  equal  importance  with  the  divine  char- 
acter and  sacred  mission  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  used 
to  be  affirmed  by  men  of  this  class  that  if  it  were 
shown  that  the  world  was  not  created  in  six  lit- 
eral days  of  twenty-four  hours  each,  then  Genesis 
was  overthrown,  the  Bible  was  disproved,  and  re- 
ligious faith  was  destroyed.  It  is  rare  to  find  any 
class  of  interpreters  to-day  who  affirm  that  the 
world  was  made  in  six  literal  days.  Perhaps  each 
one  of  these  creative  days  represented  thousands, 
possibly  millions,  of  years.  But  although  we 
have  changed  our  interpretation  regarding  the 
meaning  of  the  word  day,  we  have  not  lost  our 


JONAH  AND   HIS  BOOK.  439 

faith  in  spiritual  realities  or  in  tlie  divine  revela- 
tions given  ns  in  the  Bible.  There  was  a  time 
when  most  interpreters  of  Scripture  believed  that 
the  sun  actually  stood  still  in  the  heavens,  at  the 
command  of  Joshiui;  but  many  of  the  most  de- 
vout and  spiritual  interpreters  to-day  believe,  as 
is  plainly  stated  in  the  narrative,  that  the  descrip- 
tion is  a  quotation  taken  from  the  book  of  Jasher,  a 
book  probably  made  up  of  national,  historical,  and 
triumphal  songs  of  patriotic  heroes ;  and  that  no 
such  affirmation  as  that  the  sun  stood  still  is  made 
in  the  Bible  narrative.  We  have  unquestioning 
faith  in  God's  miracles;  but  it  is  permissible 
to  have  but  little  regard  for  miracles  which  are 
the  creations  of  extravagant  commentators  and 
unscholarly  preachers.  Several  learned  men  have 
affirmed  that  merchants  or  Arabians,  and  not 
ravens,  brought  food  to  Elijah;  by  omitting,  or 
slightly  changing,  the  vowel  points,  which  are 
admitted  to  have  no  great  authority,  the  Hebrew 
letters  may  mean  Arabians,  or  "merchants"  or 
the  "inhabitants  of  Oreb  or  Orbi."  The  word  in 
the  Hebrew  is  "Orebim. "  But  should  a  man 
adopt  any  of  these  interpretations,  we  have  no 
right  to  call  him  a  disbeliever  in  the  supernatural. 
Does  a  man  who  adopts  this  interpretation  reject 
the  New  Testament  and  disbelieve  in  Christian- 
ity? John  Jasper  stands  ready  to  charge  with 
infidelity  those  who  deny  that  "  de  sun  do  move.  *' 
Augustine  affirmed  that  the  idea  of  an  antipodes 
was  unscriptural,  for  how  could  those  who  lived 


440  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

there  see  the  Lord  when  He  should  return  to  the 
earth?  Once  many  churchmen  believed  that  the 
earth  stood  still,  and  that  the  sun  revolved  around 
it ;  and  they  thought  a  denial  of  that  belief  tended 
to  disprove  the  Bible  and  to  destroy  Christianity. 
An  "infallible"  pope  and  the  sacred  congregation 
persecuted  Galileo  and  were  ready  to  torture  all 
opposers  of  their  crude  beliefs.  Luther  con- 
demned the  Copernican  system;  he  thought  "the 
upstart  astrologer"  was  a  fool  and  was  teaching 
contrary  to  Scripture.  Calvin  also  believed  that 
faith  in  Copernicus  was  infidelity  to  Scripture. 
The  Roman  and  the  Lutheran  churches  practi- 
cally were  the  John  Jaspers  of  an  earlier  day. 
Some  evangelists  and  pastors  of  our  day  have 
fallen  into  false  methods  of  interpretation.  They 
have  raised  a  false  issue ;  they  have  manufactured 
a  test  of  fidelity  to  Scripture  which  exists  only  in 
their  excited  imagination  or  in  their  untrained  rea- 
soning. It  is  extremely  foolish  for  any  man  to  say 
that  if  Jonah  goes  Jesus  goes,  and  the  Bible  goes, 
and  Christianity  goes.  I  venture  to  afHrm  that  our 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  a  divine  revelation, 
does  not  rest  on  the  interpretation  which  we 
give  to  the  book  of  Jonah,  or  to  any  other  book 
of  the  Old  Testament.  As  we  shall  see,  there 
have  been  various  theories  of  interpretation  con- 
cerning this  book ;  but  whether  we  believe  in  the 
historical,  the  allegorical,  or  the  parabolical  inter- 
pretation, we  do  not  thereby  lose  the  symbolic 
and  spiritual  lessons  which  the  book  teaches ;  and 


JONAH  AXD   I/IS   BOO  A'.  441 

we  do  not  deny  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ  in 
His  interpretation  of  the  book,  and  we  certainly 
do  not  lose  our  faith  in  Christianity  or  revelation. 
It  is  quite  certain  that  the  chief  value  of  this  book 
in  the  time  of  our  Lord  was  its  symbolic  signifi- 
cance rather  than  its  historical  reality.  We  may 
hold  our  belief  that  the  book  is  truly  historical, 
and  yet  guard  ourselves  against  so  unwise  a  prop- 
osition as  that  our  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  depends 
upon  the  historicity,  or  upon  any  theory  of  inter- 
pretation, of  the  book  of  Jonah. 

Theories  of  Interpretation. 

There  have  been  several  well-defined  theories 
of  interpretation  of  this  book.  Some  have  af- 
firmed that  the  entire  narrative  was  a  dream 
which  Jonah  had  while  asleep  in  the  sides  of  the 
ship.  This  is  certainly  an  easy  method  of  dis- 
posing of  all  the  difficulties  which  the  narrative 
contains,  but  it  probably  suggests  more  difficul- 
ties of  another  kind  that  are  found  in  the  narra- 
tive as  we  now  have  it.  Others  have  regarded 
the  book  purely  as  an  allegory ;  they  have  consid- 
ered it  a  parody  upon,  if  not  the  original  form  of, 
various  heathen  fables,  such  as  those  of  Arion  and 
the  Dolphin,  or  the  wild  adventures  of  Hercules. 
We  know  that  Joppa  and  its  vicinity  were  the 
home  of  many  legends.  The  story  of  Androm- 
eda and  Perseus  is  located  at  this  place,  as  are 
others  of  a  somewhat  similar  character.      Even 


442  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

if  the  book  were  a  pure  allegory,  its  spiritual  les- 
sons, as  already  suggested,  would  still  remain, 
and  ou--  Lord's  use  of  it  as  recorded  in  the 
twelfth  chapter  of  Matthew  would  still  be  justi- 
fied. 

Many  of  the  most  orthodox  interpreters  have 
adopted  the  allegorical  or  dramatic  interpretation 
of  the  Song  of  Solor^on,  but  their  orthodoxy  in 
so  doing  has  never  been  called  in  question.  Sin- 
gularly enough  the  allegorical  interpretation  of 
the  Song  of  Solomon  has  been  considered  as  con- 
clusive evidence  of  orthodoxy ;  but  the  allegorical 
interpretation  of  the  book  of  Jonah  these  same 
exegetes  consider  rank  heresy.  A  third  theory  is 
that  Jonah  when  thrown  into  the  sea  was  picked 
up  by  a  ship  having  a  fish  for  a  figurehead  and 
bearing  the  name  of  a  fish.  We  know  that  it  was 
common  then,  and  is  now,  to  give  ships  the  names 
of  animals  of  various  kinds  and  to  ornament  them 
with  figureheads  representing  these  animals.  Da- 
gon  means  a  fish,  and  Dagon  was  the  national 
idol  of  the  Philistines,  with  temples  at  Gaza  and 
Ashdod  in  this  general  vicinity.  Dagon  had  the 
body  of  a  fish  and  the  head  of  a  man.  A  German 
scholar  has  adopted  this  view  and  has  argued  at 
length  in  its  favor.  It  is  an  interesting  fact  that 
Jonah's  prayer,  which,  like  Hannah's  prayer,  is 
rather  a  hymn  of  praise  than  a  prayer,  is"  uttered 
when  he  seems  to  have  escaped  from  danger 
and  not  when  he  was  in  the  midst  of  danger. 
This   interpretation  would   make    the    prayer  to 


JON  A  IT  AND   nrs  BOOK.  443 

have  been  offered  after  he  was  rescued  from  the 
sea  and  was  safely  aboard  the  ship.  Akin  to  this 
interpretation  is  that  which  makes  his  rescue  to 
have  been  due  to  a  life  preserver,  or  some  similar 
means  of  escape.  There  are  interpreters  who 
affirm  that  the  story  has  a  historical  basis,  but 
with  many  fanciful  and  mythical  additions;  while 
still  others  believe  that  the  story  is  purely  moral 
and  without  any  historical  foundation.  But  quite 
recently  another  interpretation  has  been  sug- 
gested. It  is  stated  that  the  name  Nineveh  is 
no  other  than  Ninua,  or  Nunu,  which  means 
"fish,"  and  as  the  city  was  called  the  great  city, 
its  old  Assyrian  name  was  simply  the  Great  Fish 
or  the  Fish  City.  To  this  day,  it  is  said,  the 
name  on  the  monuments  is  represented  by  a  fish 
in  a  basin  or  tank.  This  view  would  make  Nine- 
veh itself  the  "great  fish"  that  swallowed  Jonah, 
and  in  crying  to  the  Lord  for  deliverance  he  gave 
the  city  its  old  Assyrian  name,  praying  to  be  de- 
livered from  the  "  great  fish. "  There  is  historical 
truth  somewhere  in  these  many  interpretations. 
We  can  afford  to  be  patient  and  to  wait  for  fuller 
light.  I  am  not  disposed  to  give  up  the  historic- 
ity of  the  narrative.  Very  weighty  scholarship  in 
Germany,  and  to  a  very  considerable  extent  in 
Great  Britain  and  the  United  States,  is  still  in 
favor  of  the  historical  reality  of  the  narrative. 
This  view  is  held  by  such  men  as  Hess,  Heng- 
stenberg,  Baumgarten,  Delitzsch,  and  by  many  in 
Britain  and  America  of  like  broad  learning  and 


444  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

sound  judgment.  The  fact  is  that  the  denial  of 
the  historical  reality  of  the  narrative  involves 
difficulties  as  serious  as  its  frank  admission. 
There  has  been  a  vast  deal  of  silly  wit  expended 
on  this  book  as  a  "  fish  story"  of  the  ancient  time. 

Confirmatory  Evidence. 

There  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment or  the  New  to  show  that  this  narrative  is  a 
myth  or  a  parable ;  on  the  contrary,  there  is  much 
to  teach  us  that  it  is  a  record  of  an  actual  occur- 
rence. The  prophet  Jonah  is  referred  to  in  2 
Kings  xiv.  25,  and  beyond  question  the  -prophet 
who  gave  his  name  to  the  book  is  the  same  to 
whom  reference  is  there  made.  He  was  a  proph- 
et of  God  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  TI.  The 
word  Jonah  means  "  dove,"  and  his  father's  name, 
Amittai,  means  "the  truth  of  God."  It  is  almost 
certain  that  there  could  not  have  been  two  proph- 
ets bearing  the  same  name  and  sons  of  fathers 
of  the  same  name,  especially  of  names  so  sugges- 
tive and  rare  as  these.  Jonah  was  of  Gath-Hepher, 
a  town  in  lower  Galilee  in  Zebulon.  It  has  been 
suggested  that  Jonah  was  a  child  when  Homer 
sang  his  rhapsodies  on  the  shores  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean ;  that  he  was  a  contemporary  of  Lycurgus, 
the  Spartan  lawgiver,  and  that  he  was  the  senior  of 
Romxulus  by  one  century  and  of  Herodotus  by  four 
centuries.  A  criticism  has  been  made  on  the  book 
of  Jonah  because  it  is  written  in  the  third  person. 


JONAH  AND   HIS  BOOK.  445 

but  this  is  the  very  puerility  of  criticism.  We 
know  well  that  the  commentaries  of  Caesar  and 
the  Anabasis  of  Xenophon  were  also  written  in  the 
third  person.  It  has  been  charged  that  the  style 
of  the  boolv  threw  doubt  upon  its  reality,  but  a 
more  careful  scholarship  shows  that  it  is  written 
in  pure  and  simple  Hebrew.  Indeed,  almost  all 
the  more  genuinely  critical  examinations  of  these 
details  are  confirmatory  of  the  historicity  of  the 
narrative. 

This  is  especially  true  in  its  relations  to  Nine- 
veh. The  King  of  Nineveh  at  the  time  of  Jonah's 
visit  is  supposed  to  have  been  Pul,  and  Layard 
places  him  at  750  i;.c.  Nineveh  was  the  metrop- 
olis of  ancient  Assyria,  and  was  called  by  the 
Greeks  and  Romans  the  Great  Ninus  or  Ninua.  It 
was  probably  situated  on  the  east  bank  of  the  Ti- 
gris, opposite  the  modern  Mosul.  Recent  excava- 
tions confirm  statements  made  in  the  books  of 
Jonah  and  Nahum  regarding  the  immense  size  of 
Nineveh.  These  discoveries  quite  justify  the 
statement  that  it  contained  more  than  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  thousand  young  children,  thus 
indicating  that  it  had  a  population  of  at  least  half 
a  million.  The  people  were  wealthy  and  warlike. 
Nineveh  was  long  the  mistress  of  the  East.  With- 
in the  last  generation  Layard,  Botta,  Smith,  and 
others  have  been  exploring  its  mounds  and  have 
made  discoveries  confirmatory  of  the  Bible  nar- 
rative. They  have  found  sculptured  memorials 
containing  the  actual  Assyrian  accoimts  of  events 


446  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

recorded  in  the  books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles. 
They  make  mention  of  the  names  of  Jehu,  Heze- 
kiah,  Omri,  and  also  of  various  cities  in  Judea  and 
Syria.  They  also  give  Sennacherib's  own  ac- 
count of  his  invasion  of  Palestine.  It  is  as  sur- 
prising as  gratifying  that  these  long-buried  tablets 
are  confirmatory,  even  in  minute  details,  of  the 
statements  contained  in  the  Bible. 

Additional  Confirmation. 

Even  what  is  said  in  the  book  of  Jonah  regard- 
ing the  gourd  which  so  suddenly  sprang  up  is 
fully  corroborated  by  the  rapid  production  of  the 
plant  known  as  the  Palma  Christi.  This  plant  is 
found  with  broad  leaves,  giving  a  dense  shade  and 
supporting  itself  on  its  own  stem.  It  is  still  al- 
most a  miracle  in  its  wellnigh  instantaneous 
growth.  It  is  found  in  many  parts  of  Arabia, 
Syria,  and  India.  It  is  well  known  also  that  a 
species  of  the  white  shark,  sometimes  measuring 
sixty  feet  in  length,  has  been  found  in  the  Medit- 
erranean which  easily  swallows  a  man  whole,  and 
many  statements  have  been  made  as  to  the  dis- 
covery of  men  who  had  been  thus  swallowed. 
Infidels  once  objected  to  the  narrative  because  of 
the  use  of  the  word  whale,  as  it  seldom  enters 
the  Mediterranean  Sea,  and  because  the  throat  of 
some  species  is  too  small  to  swallow  a  man ;  but 
the  fact  is  that  neither  in  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old 
Testament  nor  in  the  Greek  of  the  New  has  the 


JON  Air  AND   HIS  BOOK.  447 

word  that  limited  mcanin^L;-,  the  species  of  marine 
animal  or  sea-monster  not  being-  defined.  A 
knowledge  of  Eastern  peoples  to-day  shows  how 
readily  a  whole  community  may  be  startled  into 
sudden  repentance,  or  at  least  panic,  by  the  sol- 
emn annoimcement  of  a  man  believed  to  be  a 
prophet.  Cases  are  on  record  in  which  a  Chris- 
tian priest  startled  a  whole  Mussuhnan  town  by 
declaring  that  he  had  received  a  divine  commis- 
sion to  announce  a  coming-  plague.  Plainly  there 
was  no  permanent  reformation,  no  revival,  no 
genuine  conversion  in  the  case  of  Nineveh.  We 
know,  too,  that  there  was  a  vigorous  trade  between 
Syria  and  Tarshish  in  that  early  day.  Reference 
is  made  in  the  Bible  to  the  "  ships  of  Tarshish,"  as 
we  long  spoke  of  East  Indiamen ;  as  these  in  both 
cases  were  the  greatest  ships  of  their  class.  It 
thus  comes  to  pass  that  in  all  these  incidental 
ways  confirmation  of  the  ancient  narrative  is 
found. 

It  would  not  be  at  all  surprising  if  natural  law 
should  yet  show  that  the  account  of  the  swallow- 
ing of  Jonah  by  a  great  fish  is  strictly  scientific. 
Cases  of  catalepsy,  hypnotism,  ecstasy,  and  trance 
are  almost  equally  mysterious.  Cases  of  hiberna- 
tion and  aestivation  are  cj[uite  as  difficult  of  expla- 
nation. There  are  well-attested  cases  in  which 
breathing  nearly  or  entirely  ceases.  There  is  a 
Rocky  Mountain  squirrel  whose  temperature  is 
only  three  degrees  above  the  freezing-point  dur- 
ing its  winter  sleep.      The   woodchuck  and   the 


44^  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

raccoon  roll  themselves  into  a  ball  and  press  their 
noses  so  tightly  against  their  bodies  that  breath- 
ing is  impossible.  It  is  said  also  that  the  mar- 
mots pass  into  a  state  of  such  complete  suspended 
animation  that  an  electric  shock  will  not  arouse 
them,  and  the  most  deadly  gases  will  not  affect 
them  in  the  least.  Bats  go  to  sleep  in  clusters, 
the  central  one  often  during  the  entire  winter  bear- 
ing a  weight  of  ten  pounds.  Bats  have  been  sealed 
in  glass  jars,  and  the  most  careful  tests  have  been 
made  to  see  if  any  of  the  oxygen  had  been  used, 
but  there  was  no  perceptible  change  in  the  air. 
The  common  garden  snail  covers  the  opening  of 
its  shell  with  a  silky  membrane  which  becomes 
encrusted  with  carbonate  of  lime,  hermetically 
sealing  the  creature,  which  is  w'ithout  food,  air, 
heat,  or  circulation.  Cases  are  known  in  which 
it  has  been  artificially  sealed  for  three  years,  and 
then  brought  to  life.  There  may  be  truth  in  the 
stories  told  of  toads  embedded  in  solid  rocks  and 
then  brought  to  life. 

Human  hibernation  is  equally  mysterious.  The 
fakirs  in  India  may  impose  even  on  the  most  care- 
ful scientific  men;  but  seemingly  genuine  cases 
of  inexplicable  hypnotism,  or  other  unaccountable 
conditions,  have  occurred.  Baird,  in  his  treatise 
on  the  subject,  published  in  1850,  tells  of  the  case 
of  a  man  in  Lahore  who  was  buried  alive  in  1837, 
in  the  presence  of  men  determined  to  detect 
fraud,  if  any  attempt  to  practise  it  were  made, 
and  who  was  long  after  dug  up  and  restored  to 


JONAH  AND   HIS  BOOK.  449 

life.      There  are  many  things  in  heaven  and  earth 
not  yet  explicable  by  our  philosophy. 

The  character  of  Jonah  is  also  consistent 
throughout  the  entire  book  which  bears  his  name. 
The  story  is  simple,  straightforward,  and  striking- 
ly honest ;  it  is  almost  painfully  frank  in  its  state- 
ment of  the  faults  of  its  subject  'and  writer.  It 
bears  every  evidence  of  being  a  truthful  state- 
ment. We  must  not  suppose  from  Jonah's  at- 
tempt to  flee  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  that 
he  thought  he  could  ever  escape  from  God's 
sight ;  he  was  too  familiar  with  the  truth  as  to 
God's  presence  to  be  guilty  of  such  an  error.  We 
are  rather  to  understand  the  language  to  mean 
that  he  was  determined  to  go  out  from  the  pres- 
ence of  the  Lord  as  His  servant  and  minister; 
that  is,  that  he  determined  to  set  aside  his  char- 
acter and  office  as  a  prophet  of  the  Lord.  He 
gives  evidence  that  he  possessed  a  petulant,  quer- 
ulous disposition;  indeed,  he  seems  at  times  to 
have  been  afflicted  almost  with  a  species  of  insan- 
ity. This  character  of  narrowness,  petulance, 
querulousness,  and  hypochondria  he  maintains  to 
the  very  last.  We  can  easily  see  that  he  did  not 
wish  to  be  a  prophet  to  the  Ninevitcs,  and  his 
dislike  of  them  and  of  his  errand  of  mercy  ap- 
pears to  the  close  of  the  narrative. 

The  Orientals  have  always  had  a  high  regard 
for  Jonah.  His  tomb  is  shown  with  veneration 
near  the  ruins  of  Nineveh  and  also  at  Gath-Hep- 

her,  which  was  the  place  of  his  birth.     The  Mo- 
29 


450  OLD    TESTAMENT  DIFFICULTIES. 

hammedans  honor  him  greatly.  It  is  a  striking 
fact  that  an  entire  chapter  in  the  Koran  is  in- 
scribed with  his  name.  The  difficulties  con- 
nected with  the  book,  which  have  so  strongly  in- 
fluenced the  critics  of  the  Occident,  have  never 
been  influential  in  the  minds  of  the  people  of  the 
Orient.  The  book  of  Tobit  recognized  Jonah  as 
an  historacil  character ;  and  this  fact  is  significant 
as  indicating  current  Jewish  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject. The  readers  of  Josephus  know  of  the  testi- 
mony of  a  similar  purport  which  he  bears  to  the 
historical  character  of  Jonah. 

The  book  should  be  studied  afresh.  The  chief 
purpose  of  the  author  was  to  teach  great  moral 
and  spiritual  lessons ;  and  such  lessons  our  Lord 
taught  us  from  the  book.  It  shows  God's  for- 
giveness to  a  heathen  city  when  its  repentance 
became  manifest.  It  shows  that  God  cares  not 
for  the  chosen  nation  alone,  but  for  all  men. 
Here  are  suggested  large  lessons  of  sympathy  and 
love;  here  we  see  God's  greatness  and  man's  lit- 
tleness, God's  patience  and  man's  petulance, 
God's  charity  and  man's  cruelty.  Let  us  study 
the  book  for  its  beauty  as  literature,  its  charm  as 
a  souvenir  of  a  remote  time  and  civilization,  and 
especially  as  a  revelation  of  divine  love  and 
mercy.  Whatever  interpretation  we  may  give 
to  some  of  its  parts,  its  great  lessons  will  stand, 
honored  by  the  approval  of  Jesus  Christ  and  com- 
mended by  our  sense  of  God's  justice,  mercy,  truth 
and  grace. 


BS1171.M11 

Bible  difficulties  and  their  alleviative 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00043  0852 


\\^$&^$:$<;"«^\\<i$i?S§5S^ 


